Judgment :- These petitioners coming on for hearing upon perusing the petition and the respective memo of grounds filed in support thereof and seen hearing the arguments of Mr. K. Kumar, Spl. P.P. for FERA, Advocate for the petitioner in all the petitions, and of Mr. Vabibulla Badra, Senior Advocate for the respondent in each of these petitions, the Court made the following order :- All these petitions, since common question is involved, are clubbed together, heard and common order is passed. 2.The petitioner is the Enforcement Officer. He is seeking for cancellation of the bail granted by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Economic Offences-I, Madras on 20-4-1995. According to the petitioner the enquiry conducted and the documents seized, revealed that respondents have vilated the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act. It is also submitted that the presence of the respondents is very much necessary since the investigation is at the preliminary stage and having regard to the ramifications involved in the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground the written objections have to be vetted at New Delhi sought for adjournment and the learned Magistrate refused the same and passed orders on 20-4-1995 granting bail to the respondents. The case of the petitioner is that the matter is the off shoot of the poceedings before the Supreme Court of India inJain Brothers'case. Having regard to the magnitude of the case, the learned Magistrate ought to have granted atleast a reasonable time to file the objections. 3.The contention of the petitioner is that the enlargement of respondents on bail is illegal and opposed to principles of natural justice and fair play in action. 4.Both the counsel argued the matter at length. However, both of them submitted that the matter may be remitted to the learned Magistrate for fresh disposal after affording an opportunity to both parties. It is the established judicial principle that every party should be given adequate notice and opportunity of being heard. Observance of fundamental principles of natural justice is necessary if the Courts are to command public confidence. It is the established judicial principle that every party should be given adequate notice and opportunity of being heard. Observance of fundamental principles of natural justice is necessary if the Courts are to command public confidence. Having regard to the magnitude of the matter, when the petitioner sought for an adjournment to file a written objection and that too when he had already been sent for vetting to Delhi and is awaited, in normal course, the learned Magistrate ought to have povided an opportunity, if not for a longer time, atleast a reasonable time. Non-observance of natural justice is itself prejudice to a person and proof of prejudice independently of denial of natural justice is unnecessary. The principles of natural justice have taken deep root in judicial conscience, and now considered so fundamental in every decision making function. 5.The impugned order of the leaned Magistrate granting bail is set aside. However, the petitioner conceded to maintain thestatus quoas on today till the disposal of the bail application by the learned Magistrate. His statement is placed on record and the matter is remitted to the learned Magistrate. He shall afford an opportunity to both the parties and dispose of the application in accordance with law. Having regard to the nature of the cases, the learned Magistrate to dispose of the application without loss of much time and with all expedition and the respondents should not be allowed to circumvent the process of investigation by prolonging the proceedings, keeping the application pending before Court. The petitions are allowed.