Calcutta High Court rules that penalty appeals under repealed FERA retain penal character and may be heard as criminal appeals despite FEMA’s enactment.
FERA Penalty Appeals Retain Penal Character: Calcutta HC
The Calcutta High Court has ruled that appellate proceedings arising from penalties imposed under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA)—even when appeals are filed after the enactment of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA)—retain their penal character. As such, they can be heard under criminal appellate jurisdiction.
The Court distinguished FERA from FEMA, noting that FERA was a penal statute with strict enforcement mechanisms, whereas FEMA is largely civil and remedial. The ruling confirms that despite FERA’s repeal, ongoing enforcement of penalties or appeals from past orders fall within the scope of criminal law due to their punitive nature.
"Proceedings under FERA were intrinsically penal, and the character of a proceeding does not change merely because it is adjudicated after repeal."The decision preserves the rights of appellants and affirms courts’ authority to hear such matters under criminal procedure. Practitioners dealing with legacy FERA cases must consider filing in appropriate criminal forums under the CrPC, or its successor BNSS, where applicable.
Citations
- Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973
- Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999
