General
DMK MP and Family Move High Court Against FEMA Property Seizure
Reported by Sneha Patil (Staff Writer) · The Hindu - National ·
DMK Lok Sabha member S. Jagathrakshakan, his son J. Sundeep Anand, and his daughter J. Sri Nisha have moved the Madras High Court to challenge the seizure of properties worth ₹45.34 crore by the Directorate of Enforcement. The central agency acted under the Foreign Exchange Management Act of 1999 over an alleged rule violation amounting to ₹161.12 crore.
Court and Tribunal Details
A bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan admitted the civil appeals and ordered a notice to the Enforcement Department. The family challenged a May 21, 2026, order by a FEMA appellate tribunal in New Delhi that had partly confirmed the property seizure.
Background of the Case
The case stems from the June 2017 setup of Silver Park International Pte. Limited in Singapore, where the MP held 70 lakh shares and his son held 20 lakh shares. The inquiry began after the MP mentioned his past directorship in an election affidavit, and the Reserve Bank of India confirmed it had no record of the company. The family members gifted and transferred shares among themselves without getting prior RBI permission, believing approval was only needed when money was paid. The original seizure of ₹89.17 crore worth of properties was later reduced to ₹45.34 crore by the tribunal.
Context
Foreign exchange laws in India regulate how residents acquire and hold assets outside the country to prevent illegal capital outflows. The Enforcement Directorate investigates such financial irregularities under civil and criminal frameworks. High Courts review orders passed by appellate tribunals to ensure legal correctness.
ExplainerWhy this matters
What Happened
DMK MP S. Jagathrakshakan and his family members approached the Madras High Court to challenge a tribunal order that upheld the seizure of their properties worth ₹45.34 crore under FEMA provisions.
Why It Matters
The case highlights strict regulatory scrutiny over foreign asset holdings by public representatives and ordinary citizens alike. It tests legal interpretations of whether acquiring foreign company shares without prior central bank approval constitutes a violation of foreign exchange laws even if no direct money payment was proven at the time of transfer.
What Happens Next
The Madras High Court will hear the arguments from both the family and the Enforcement Directorate to decide whether the tribunal's partial confirmation of the property seizure is legally valid.
More in General
GeneralSource: The HinduWorth knowing
Hyderabad food safety officials clarify suspension rules after restaurant owners meet commissioner
Reported by Imran Qureshi (Staff Writer) · The Hindu - National ·

