IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MFA.No. 662 of 2003()
1. THEDIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. K.VEERANKUTTY, KEEZHISSERIL HOUSE,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.K.RAMKUMAR
For Respondent :SRI.R.RAJESH KORMATH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice J.B.KOSHY
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH
Dated :20/08/2008
O R D E R
J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ.
-------------------------------
M.F.A. (FERA).NO.662 OF 2003 (E)
-----------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of August, 2008
J U D G M E N T
KOSHY,J.
One K.Ahamed Kunhi’s residence was searched and
unaccounted money was seized. It has come out from the
statement of K.Ahamed that he has distributed about Rs.40
lakhs as compensation amount on behalf of one Sheik Ahamed
Haji, who is doing business in Abudhabi. According to his
statement, out of the Rs.40 lakhs, Rs.26 lakhs was received
from various unknown persons and Rs.14 lakhs was received
from K.Veerankutty, respondent in this case, at the
instructions of Sheik Ahmed Haji. The sum and substance of
the statement of Veerankutty was that Sheik Ahmed Haji is
his father-in-law and Rs.14 lakhs entrusted by him was given
to Syed Alavi Haji as instructed by the father-in-law. He is not
aware how the amount is due to Syed Alavi Haji and how Haji
is going to spent that money. Syed Alavi Haji and
Veerankutty were arrested by the Special Director of
Enforcement Directorate (FERA) and a penalty of
Rs.8,50,000/- was imposed on Sri.Syed Alavi Haji and
MFA.662/03 2
Rs.4 lakhs was imposed on Veerankutty. Veerankutty filed
an appeal. Penalty was imposed under Section 9 (1) (b) and 9
(1) (d). The respondent’s contention was considered by the
appellate tribunal. Mainly it is contended that his statement
was obtained by coercion. It is also contended that he was not
aware how the money is being used. He only handed over the
money given to him by his father-in-law as instructed by him.
Tribunal reduced the fine after considering the facts and
circumstances of the case. The Tribunal did not hold that
Veerankutty is not guilty because he has no mensrea or has
retracted his statement as contended by the appellant. But
considering the circumstances and the role played by
Veerankutty, penalty was reduced. We are of the opinion that
it is a discretionary order by the Tribunal and no question of
law is involved in this appeal, and hence, this appeal is
dismissed.
J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE
THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE
prp
MFA.662/03 3
J.B.KOSHY & K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JJ.
——————————————————–
M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 ()
———————————————————
J U D G M E N T
———————————————————
4th August, 2008