NEW DELHI: The safety loved by a lady beneath Code of Legal Process (CrPC) is just not out there in proceedings associated to Overseas Alternate Administration Act (Fema), which is ruled by civil regulation, Delhi excessive court docket has dominated.Justice Neena Bansal Krishna dismissed a writ petition filed by a 53-year-old Canadian citizen difficult ED summons issued beneath Fema Part 37 for recording of her assertion, rejecting the competition that safeguards assured to girls beneath CrPC utilized to such summons.The petitioner argued that she couldn’t be compelled to seem on the ED workplace and her assertion should be recorded at her residence. She cited CrPC Part 160(1), which prevents girls from being required to seem at locations apart from their residence for investigation. Nonetheless, the HC highlighted that Fema investigations have been civil-administrative proceedings, not felony inquiries, and subsequently, the gender-based safety out there beneath CrPC couldn’t be invoked.“The PMLA and the Fema have distinct statutory frameworks and nature of proceedings. Part 50 PMLA confers felony investigative powers on ED involving summons for inquiries associated to cash laundering, which is a scheduled offence beneath PMLA and entails felony prosecution. In distinction, Part 37 Fema is primarily involved with civil-administrative investigations of international trade contraventions ruled by a regulatory framework distinct from felony regulation. Secondly, there’s a distinction within the scope of summons and procedural safeguards,” the court docket stated.“Civil code accommodates no provision like Part 160 CrPC mandating the recording of the assertion of a lady at her residence. The insistence of the petitioner for not showing earlier than the authority is, subsequently, with none foundation,” Justice Krishna noticed.“Powers concerning discovery and manufacturing of proof beneath Part 37 Fema are analogous to these beneath Part 131 Revenue Tax Act, which is ruled by civil code and subsequently, Part 160 CrPC wouldn’t be relevant,” HC added.