UNION OF INDIA versus SUKUMAR PYNE

UNION OF INDIA versus SUKUMAR PYNE

The amended sections 23(1) and 23D of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 are procedural and do not violate Articles 14 or 20(1) of the Constitution. There is no vested right to a specific forum or particular procedure. The amendment can apply retrospectively to cases of earlier contravention, as no greater penalty is prescribed than previously, and procedural amendments generally cover pending or prior matters unless expressly excluded by statute or constitutional protection.

Parties
Appellant: Union of India; Respondent: Sukumar Pyne
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
06 October 1965
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Calcutta High Court, Judgment Dated August 10, 1961, in Civil Rule No. 1428 of 1958
Outcome
Appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
Retrospective Operation of Statutes, Procedural Vs Substantive Law, Right to Procedure, Article 14, Article 20(1), Ultra Vires, Adjudication Under Foreign Exchange Regulation Act
Constitutional Law Criminal Law Administrative Law Retrospective Operation of Statutes Procedural Vs Substantive Law Right to Procedure Article 14 Article 20(1) +2 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Union of India

Appellant

Sukumar Pyne

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Calcutta High Court, Judgment Dated August 10, 1961, in Civil Rule No. 1428 of 1958

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the amended sections 23(1) and 23D of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 violate Articles 14 and 20(1) of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether the Amending Act 39 of 1957 applies retrospectively to contraventions committed before its commencement
  3. 3 Whether there is a vested right to be tried by a particular court or procedure

Ratio Decidendi

The amended sections 23(1) and 23D of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 are procedural and do not violate Articles 14 or 20(1) of the Constitution. There is no vested right to a specific forum or particular procedure. The amendment can apply retrospectively to cases of earlier contravention, as no greater penalty is prescribed than previously, and procedural amendments generally cover pending or prior matters unless expressly excluded by statute or constitutional protection.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed.

Orders

  • Petition under Article 226 is dismissed.
  • The appellant is entitled to costs in Supreme Court and High Court.