Case Note & Summary
The case originated from Crime No.11 of 2015 registered by Pulakeshinagar Police Station, Bengaluru, against three accused persons for offences under Sections 3, 10, 13, 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Sections 120B and 121A of the Indian Penal Code, and Sections 4, 5, and 6 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. The case was subsequently transferred to the Central Crime Branch, which investigated and filed a charge sheet. The Special Court took cognizance, framed charges, and commenced trial. At the stage when P.Ws.1 and 2 had been examined, the appellant-accused No.1 filed an application under Section 20 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, seeking transfer of the case to a Sessions Court on the ground that the offence was not investigated by the National Investigation Agency. The Special Court rejected the application. The appellant then filed the present criminal appeal under Section 21 of the NIA Act. The High Court, after hearing the parties, held that Section 20 of the NIA Act does not mandate that every case involving scheduled offences must be investigated by the NIA. The investigation by the State police was valid, and the Special Court had jurisdiction to try the case. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Transfer of Case - Section 20 of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 - Application for transfer of case to Sessions Court on ground that investigation was not conducted by NIA - Held that Section 20 of NIA Act does not mandate that every case involving scheduled offences must be investigated by NIA; State police investigation is valid and Special Court has jurisdiction to try the case (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Special Court erred in rejecting the appellant's application under Section 20 of the NIA Act seeking transfer of the case to a Sessions Court on the ground that the offence was not investigated by the National Investigation Agency.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the Special Court correctly rejected the application under Section 20 of NIA Act. The investigation by the State police was valid, and the Special Court had jurisdiction to try the case.
Law Points
- Section 20 of NIA Act
- Section 21 of NIA Act
- Jurisdiction of Special Court
- Transfer of case
- Investigation by State Police
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act
- 1967
Case Details
2019 LawText (KAR) (07) 45
Criminal Appeal No. 97 of 2018
Justice Ravi Malimath, Justice H.P. Sandesh
Sri. S. Balakrishnan (for appellant), Sri. Sandesh J. Chouta, Additional Advocate General along with Sri. S.V. Girikumar, Additional Government Advocate (for respondent)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against rejection of application under Section 20 of NIA Act seeking transfer of case to Sessions Court.
Remedy Sought
The appellant sought to set aside the order dated 08.01.2018 in Special C.C. No.330/2015 rejecting the application under Section 20 of NIA Act and to transfer the case to a Sessions Court having jurisdiction to try the offence not investigated by NIA.
Filing Reason
The appellant contended that the case involved scheduled offences under the NIA Act and since the investigation was not conducted by the NIA, the Special Court lacked jurisdiction and the case should be transferred to a Sessions Court.
Previous Decisions
The Special Court rejected the application under Section 20 of NIA Act on 08.01.2018.
Issues
Whether the Special Court erred in rejecting the application under Section 20 of NIA Act seeking transfer of the case to a Sessions Court on the ground that the offence was not investigated by the NIA.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant argued that since the investigation was not conducted by the NIA, the Special Court had no jurisdiction and the case should be transferred to a Sessions Court.
The respondent argued that Section 20 of NIA Act does not mandate NIA investigation for all scheduled offences and the State police investigation was valid.
Ratio Decidendi
Section 20 of the NIA Act does not mandate that every case involving scheduled offences must be investigated by the NIA. The State police investigation is valid, and the Special Court has jurisdiction to try the case.
Judgment Excerpts
The case of the prosecution is that a case in Crime No.11 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 10, 13, 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (‘UA(P)’ Act for short) and Section 120B and 121A of Indian Penal Code and Sections 4, 5 and 6 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 was registered by Pulakeshinagar Police Station, Bengaluru against three accused persons.
The case was subsequently transferred to the Central Crime Branch, who investigated the same and filed the charge sheet.
At the stage when P.Ws.1 and 2 had been examined, the appellant-accused No.1 filed an application under Section 20 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NIA Act’ for short) on the ground that...
Procedural History
A case in Crime No.11 of 2015 was registered by Pulakeshinagar Police Station for offences under UA(P) Act, IPC, and Explosive Substances Act. The case was transferred to Central Crime Branch, which investigated and filed charge sheet. The Special Court took cognizance, framed charges, and commenced trial. During trial, after examination of P.Ws.1 and 2, the appellant-accused No.1 filed an application under Section 20 of NIA Act seeking transfer to Sessions Court. The Special Court rejected the application on 08.01.2018. The appellant filed Criminal Appeal No.97 of 2018 under Section 21 of NIA Act before the High Court of Karnataka.
Acts & Sections
- National Investigation Agency Act, 2008: 20, 21
- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967: 3, 10, 13, 18
- Indian Penal Code: 120B, 121A
- Explosive Substances Act, 1908: 4, 5, 6
