Investigating Agencies & Courts Should Strictly Adhere To May 2017 Notification On Demonetised Currency Exchange: Karnataka HC
The Karnataka High Court observed that investigating agencies and Courts are to adhere to the 2017 notification on demonetised currency exchange strictly.
The Court was hearing a Writ Appeal filed by the Reserve Bank of India challenging the order passed in the Writ Petition where the Court directed RBI to consider the case of the Petitioner, who had made representations at Annexures-F, G and J, whereby, the Petitioner had sought for appropriate direction against the Respondents to exchange the value of a demonetized currency with legal tender.
The bench of Justice S. Sunil Dutt Yadav and Justice Ramachandra D. Huddar observed, “Unless there is adherence to the requirements of the notification strictly, parties to the litigation would be prejudiced irreparably without any lapse on their part Accordingly, the investigating agencies and the Courts are to adhere to the requirements of the notification dated 12.05.2017 strictly.”
Senior Advocate BC Thiruvengadam appeared for the Appellant and DSGI Sudhir Singh R. Vijapur appeared for the Respondent.
The Court noticed that the Courts before which the Bank notes seized by the investigating authorities have been produced are required to follow the procedure as indicated in the notification issued by the Ministry of Finance on May 12, 2017, and if such procedure is not followed, it would result in many of the litigants, who had no role in delayed attempt of exchanging the demonetized notes for legal tender, being prejudiced.
The Court perused the notification and noted that “…in case confiscation of specified Bank notes by the investigating agencies and same is deposited by the Court, and once the same are returned by the Court to a person, who is the party in the case pending/decided before that Court, such person who is in receipt of the Bank notes may on production of direction of the Court, seek for exchange of such specified Bank notes.”
Accordingly, the Court directed the authorities to enable the Petitioner to rely on the directions passed by the Court and seek appropriate relief in terms of the notification of May 12, 2017.
The Court further said that the fresh representation given by the Petitioner would be treated to be a continuation of the earlier representations made to the Reserve Bank of India.
Finally, the Court disposed of the Writ Appeal.
Cause Title: Reserve Bank Of India v. Sanjukumar (Neutral Citation: 2024:KHC-K:6915-DB)
Appearance:
Appellant: Senior Advocate BC Thiruvengadam, Advocates Manik BT and Ajay Jawali
Respondent: DSGI Sudhir Singh R. Vijapur and Advocate Ashok B. Mulage