The Calcutta High Court has ruled that FERA penalty appeals filed after FEMA’s enactment retain penal character and may be heard as criminal appeals, preserving claimants’ rights.
The Calcutta High Court has held that appellate proceedings arising from penalties imposed under the now-repealed Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA), even if filed after the enactment of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), retain their penal character. As such, they may be treated as criminal appeals and heard accordingly.
The court reasoned that the nature of the proceeding is determined by the character of the original adjudication, not the timing of the appeal. This preserves the legal rights of appellants to seek remedies in appropriate forums despite the legislative shift from FERA’s punitive regime to FEMA’s civil framework.
For practitioners handling legacy FERA cases, this offers a pathway to pursue appeals in criminal forums. It also clarifies jurisdictional confusion in long-pending enforcement cases, reinforcing the principle that substantive rights are not extinguished by procedural changes.
