IMPORTANT POINTS
Non compliance of Section 20­A(1) vitiates entire proceeding under TADA Act.
The Dy SP can be apprised of the matter by sending a rukka for his sanction before recording FIR.
Where the offence under TADA is secondary and main offence like murder, rape, smuggling, narcotics, POCSO Act etc. cannot be delayed, information van be recorded before obtaining sanction of DySP.
When accused is proceeded against for offences under TADA as well other offences and proceeding under TADA is quashed for non compliance of section 20-A(1), proceedings under other offences will continue.

JUDGMENT

Deepak Gupta, J.

1. This appeal by the accused is directed against the order passed by the Designated TADA Court whereby the application filed by the accused that they should be discharged due to noncompliance of Section 20­A(1) of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as ‘TADA Act”) was dismissed.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that appellant no. 1/accused no. 1, Ebha Arjun Jadeja, was wanted in Crime No. II 3/1994 registered against him under Section 25(1B)(a) and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 and under Section 3 and 5 of TADA Act etc.

3. The prosecution version is that on 10.04.1995, when Police Inspector C.J. Singh along with some other police personnel was doing night round in Kutiyana and was trying to keep a secret watch over bootleggers, he received some information that appellant no. 1, who was absconding in Crime No. II­3/1994, was coming to his village in a motor vehicle. The police inspector arranged two witnesses and after preparing preliminary panchnama, left Kutiyana in a Government jeep at about 1.00­ 1.15 a.m. They set up a naka and at about 2.45 a.m., one motor vehicle came from the side of village Garej. The vehicle was asked to stop and it stopped. Accused no. 1 was found sitting on the driver’s seat. The police cordoned the motor vehicle in which two other persons (appellant nos.2 and 3) were also sitting. All these three persons were asked to get down and disclose their identities. On making personal search of these three persons, following recoveries were made:

4. The three accused persons could not produce any licence and the aforesaid arms were seized. Though the first information report (FIR) was recorded under the Arms Act, in the very same FIR, the officer also recorded as follows:

“One 9 MM semi automatic prohibited foreign made pistol and its cartridges loaded in it and Japan made revolver and its cartridges in a loaded condition were found from Mer Ebha Arjan. Out of which, it becomes from the smell coming from the barrel of the pistol and box that the same is used before some time for firing. From the two persons with Jadeja Ebha Arjan, namely, Mer Bachu Bhima and Mer Keshu Chana also, two country made tamanchas are found and Mer Ebha Arjan is a gang leader of gundas in Porbandar area and in that circumstances, the persons as above are found in an Ambassador car no.GJ­M­8905 and it appears that they are going to commit any terrorist activity and so all the three persons were legally arrested for the offence under Sections 25(1)(Ba), 27 of the Arms Act and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and motor car Ambassador no.GJM­8905 valuing at Rs.100000/­ was also seized in this case.

Hence, it is my complaint against them for the offence under Sections 25(1)(BA), 27 of the Arms Act and Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. My witnesses are panchas with me and the police personnel and others who are found during the investigation.

The above persons were found in possession of weapons and cartridges from out of the weapons and explosives mentioned in Arms Rules 1962 Schedule­1 Class­1 and Class­3(A) Column no.2 and 3 in public area and hence, as the offence under Section 5 of TADA Act is also made out and so, arrangement is made for obtaining the sanction of the District Superintendent of Police, Porbandar under Section 20(A)(1) of the Act, by making a report along