The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CLAT Exam > CLAT Questions > The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 a...

To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.

Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.

Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?

a)
Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.
b)
Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.
c)
Both (A) and (B)
d)
No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.

Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be ...

Both (A) and (B). An FEO is considered to be qualified on these two points as per the above passage. A statement from PMLA is required for declaration and not qualification.

Answered by Glance Learning Institute · View profile

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Vijay Mallya, chief of erstwhile Kingfisher Airlines who owes over Rs 9,000 crore to various Indian banks, had fled India to escape legal proceedings regarding the loans. Such cases have severe consequences as it hampers investigation in criminal cases, wastes precious time of courts of law and most noticeably undermines the rule of law of the country. Does Vijay Mallya qualify to be considered as an FEO as per the above passage?

View answer

The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. A company may be barred from filing a suit against a supplier of goods or from defending a case where tax dues are imposed on it. There may also be instances where creditors obtain court orders for repayment of loans against the company, without the company having an opportunity to present its defence. In all such cases, the interests of the remaining shareholders will not be protected owing to such a bar on companies. A company can be barred from all of the above in which of the following cases?

View answer

The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Which of the following is mentioned as a criticism by the author in the above passage?

View answer

The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. The authorities under the PMLA, 2002 will exercise powers given to them under the Bill. These powers will be similar to those of a civil court. Which of the below is not a power they can exercise?

View answer

The Writ Jurisdiction of Supreme Court can be invoked under Article 32 of the Constitution for the violation of fundamental rights guaranteed under Part - III of the Constitution. Any provision in any Constitution for Fundamental Rights is meaningless unless there are adequate safeguards to ensure enforcement of such provisions. Since the reality of such rights is tested only through the judiciary, the safeguards assume even more importance. In addition, enforcement also depends upon the degree of independence of the Judiciary and the availability of relevant instruments with the executive authority. Indian Constitution, like most of Western Constitutions, lays down certain provisions to ensure the enforcement of Fundamental Rights. However, Article 32 is referred to as the “Constitutional Remedy” for enforcement of Fundamental Rights. This provision itself has been included in the Fundamental Rights and hence it cannot be denied to any person. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar described Article 32 as the most important one, without which the Constitution would be reduced to nullity. It is also referred to as the heart and soul of the Constitution. By including Article 32 in the Fundamental Rights, the Supreme Court has been made the protector and guarantor of these Rights. An application made under Article 32 of the Constitution before the Supreme Court, cannot be refused on technical grounds. In addition to the prescribed five types of writs, the Supreme Court may pass any other appropriate order. Moreover, only the questions pertaining to the Fundamental Rights can be determined in proceedings against Article 32. Under Article 32, the Supreme Court may issue a Writ against any person or government within the territory of India. Where the infringement of a Fundamental Right has been established, the Supreme Court cannot refuse relief on the ground that the aggrieved person may have remedy before some other court or under the ordinary law.The relief can also not be denied on the ground that the disputed facts have to be investigated or some evidence has to be collected. Even if an aggrieved person has not asked for a particular Writ, the Supreme Court, after considering the facts and circumstances, may grant the appropriate Writ and may even modify it to suit the exigencies of the case. Normally, only the aggrieved person is allowed to move the Court. But it has been held by the Supreme Court that in social or public interest matters, any one may move the Court. A Public Interest Litigation can be filed before the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution or before the High Court of a State under Article 226 of the Constitution under their respective Writ Jurisdictions.All of the following can be inferred from the passage except

View answer

Top Courses for CLATView all

Current Affairs: Daily, Weekly & Monthly

Legal Reasoning for CLAT

Lucent for GK

Crash Course for CLAT

CLAT Mock Test Series 2026

Top Courses for CLAT

View all

The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2017 allows for a person to be declared as a fugitive economic offender (FEO) if: (i) an arrest warrant has been issued against him for any specified offences where the value involved is over Rs 100 crore, and (ii) he has left the country and refuses to return to face prosecution.To declare a person an FEO, an application will be filed in a Special Court (designated under the Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002) containing details of the properties to be confiscated, and any information about the person’s whereabouts. The Special Court will require the person to appear at a specified place at least six weeks from issue of notice. Proceedings will be terminated if the person appears. The Bill allows authorities to provisionally attach properties of an accused, while the application is pending before the Special Court. Upon declaration as an FEO, properties of a person may be confiscated and vested in the central government, free of encumbrances (rights and claims in the property). The Bill does not specify how the central government will use the sale proceeds. That is, would the government be obliged to share the sale proceeds with persons who may have a claim against the FEO.Further, the FEO or any company associated with him may be barred from filing or defending civil claims. Under Clause 14, any court or tribunal may bar a FEO from filing or defending any civil claim before it. Further, the Bill allows courts to bar a company from filing or defending any civil claim before it if the promoter, key managerial personnel (such as manager or CEO), or majority shareholder is an FEO. It may be argued that such a bar could violate Article 21 of the Constitution. Article 21 states that no person (or company) can be deprived of their right to life or personal liberty, except by law. Courts have interpreted this to include the right to access justice, which cannot be taken away. This right includes the availability of a forum which aggrieved persons may approach to seek legal remedy. The question is whether a bar on filing and defending claims would violate this right. For instance, an individual who is declared an FEO may be involved in a marriage suit or inheritance dispute. Under Clause 14, courts are allowed to bar the individual from exercising his right to file or defend such a claim. Further, there may be cases where an FEO is the majority shareholder of a company. In such cases, even though the company is a separate legal entity, it may be barred from filing or defending cases.Q. Nirav Modi, who is wanted in the Rs13,570 crore-fraud caused to the Punjab National Bank (PNB), left the country to avoid criminal prosecution. Will he be considered as an FEO as per the paragraph above?a)Yes, as he has left the country and refuses to be extradited back to India.b)Yes, as he was involved in a scam of more than 100 crore rupees and thus can be qualified as an FEO.c)Both (A) and (B)d)No, as under Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002, a statement against him was not filed.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.

Explore Courses for CLAT exam