Articles
 

Jurisdiction of Appellate Tribunal to condone delay beyond the date prescribed under FERA: An Analysis
CS. PR. Raamaanathan

In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court had considered and decided a question of whether the Appellate Tribunal constituted under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA) was right in rejecting a belated appeal filed under Section 19 of the FEMA, applying the first proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 52 of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (FERA) instead of following the proviso to Sub-section (2) of Section 19 of the FEMA in the case of Thirumali Chemicals Ltd. v. Union of India and Others (CA Nos. 3191-3194 of 2011). This article analyses the case and also discusses about the power of Appellate Tribunal to condone delay if the appeal was not filed within the prescribed time limit, provided sufficient cause is shown under FEMA.

The Indian Penal Code: Differences Between Justification and Excuses and Mistakes, Necessity And Accidents As Defenses
Sarica Ashok Reddy

This article covers the distinction between two closely related aspects of the Indian Penal code, general or affirmative defenses of, justification and excuses. In the context of the criminal law, justification and excuse are touchstones for prescribing and proscribing conduct generally and for assigning guilt or innocence in the particular case. They are of paramount importance in both establishing the parameters of criminal offenses and providing for their principled enforcement. When operating in this fashion, justification and excuse provide an exculpatory rationale for finding an actor not guilty, even if he has engaged in all the conduct, possessed the state of mind, and caused the harm otherwise necessary to constitute a crime. Four distinctions between claims of justification and of excuse, in this article, warrant emphasis, as they are of utmost important for understanding the concept of justification and excuses better.