AIR 2020 SUPREME COURT 3448 ::AIROnline 2019 SC 1390 ::(2020) 207 All Ind Cas 217 (SC) ::2021 (3) Mh LJ (Cri) 206 ::2020 (111) All Cri C 597 ::2020 (1) All Cri LR 807 ::2020 (1) SCC (Cri) 94 ::(2019) 3 UC 1691

Supreme Court Of India

(From : 2016 (1) ADR 490 (Del.))

Hon'ble Judge(s): R. Banumathi, R. Subhash Reddy , JJ

(A) Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.482— Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (42 of 2010) , S.3, S.4, S.23— Quashing of FIR - Jurisdictional error - Allegations that respondent received foreign contributions in violation of provisions under FCRA - Initially cognizance taken under provisions of FCRA, 2010 - Revisional authority while allowing revision, altered cognizance under provisions of FCRA, 1976 without giving any notice and opportunity to respondent - Question whether said foreign contributions were received as gift or not is serious factual dispute - Even findings with regard to applicability of FCRA 1976, to be recorded after trial - High Court exercising inherent powers by going into minute details on allegations made by CBI and defence put forth, erroneous - Order of High Court liable to be set aside. 2016 (1) ADR 490 (Del.), Reversed. (Para 18 19) (B) Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (42 of 2010) , S.3, S.4, S.23— Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.101— Foreign Contribution - Burden of proof - Question whether respondent, MLA received foreign contributions as gift from his father or not is a serious factual dispute - Burden to prove that he received such funds from his father is on respondent. (Para 21 ....