FCRA case: SC issues notice to Anand Grover, Indira Jaising about CBI's guilty plea against the HC order

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday requested the response of the NGO group of lawyers and its founding members and in a plea challenging the order of the Bombay High Court that grants them protection against coercive actions against them in an alleged case.

A bank composed of the President of the Supreme Court and Judges Aniruddha Bose and Krishna Murari issued a notice to the main lawyers and the NGO.

The higher court also refused to suspend the order of the Bombay High Court.

The CBI had registered a case against Grover and the NGO for alleged violation of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act (FCRA) in the use of foreign funds received by the Bar Association.

The investigative agency argued that the Superior Court had not given any conclusion on how the FIR registered against the accused parties was unsustainable and of bad law, nor did it refer to any conclusion on how the continuation of the investigation against the accused would be contrary to the law.

Grover and his wife had approached the superior court in July seeking that the FIR registered by the IWC against the NGO and they in June be annulled.

The IWC registered the FIR following a complaint from the Ministry of Interior (MHA) in May alleging violation of.

While the FIR did not name Jaising as the accused, the MHA complaint, which is part of the FIR, mentioned her name and made specific accusations against her.

The CBI alleged that the NGO received foreign funds between 2009 and 2015, but did not reveal an important part of it.

He said Grover and Jaising used foreign funds for personal benefits.

According to the MHA complaint, during her tenure as Additional Attorney General, Jaising continued to receive the remuneration of the NGO, the CBI said, adding that this came from foreign contributions received.

The petitioners also noted that the MHA complaint was based on a 2016 inspection report that had indicated a single violation of the non-disclosure under the FCRA. At that time, after the inspection report, the MHA had issued an order canceling the registration of Collective Lawyers to receive foreign funds.

This cancellation order was challenged in the higher court by the NGO in 2017, and is currently pending before a single judge, the petitioners said.

In granting the provisional reparation, the division bank took note of the petitioners' assertion that the IWC act of presenting an FIR on the basis of a two-and-a-half-year report, when the matter had reached The court was questionable.

comments