In Brief
The Supreme Court resolved a conflict between High Courts on the interpretation of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976. The central question was whether authorities must serve a primary notice on a convicted smuggler before initiating forfeiture proceedings against his relatives who hold the disputed properties in their own names. The Court held that no primary notice to the convict is mandatory when the properties are held and owned by the relatives themselves. The notice must be served on the actual holder and person affected—the relative who owns and possesses the property. The convict need not be notified if he does not own the property. The Court emphasised the Act's purpose: reaching illegally acquired properties wherever they are screened, and that relatives become subject to the Act only to prevent them from being used as fronts for the convict's illegal assets. The appeals succeeded, and the matter was remanded to the High Court for consideration of other issues.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.