SUPERINTENDENT AND REMEMBRANCER OF LEGAL AFFAIRS, WEST vs GIRISH KUMAR NAVALAKHA & ORS.

The Supreme Court dismissed the revision, holding that Section 23 of the Act provides for two distinct procedures for dealing with contraventions, where certain offenders may avoid criminal prosecution if the Director of Enforcement finds that a penalty would suffice. The Court established that under-inclusion in classification does not necessarily violate Article 14, as it allows legislative flexibility to address social and economic issues. The Court emphasized that the legislature is presumed to act with a constitutionally permissible objective, and the experience of the Government indicated that departmental adjudication is more effective for certain foreign-exchange offences than traditional criminal prosecution.