P.S. Dinesh Kumar, J.

1. These appeals raise an important question touching upon 'doctrine of separation of powers' and 'scope of judicial review'.

2. Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, passed an order directing the National Investigation Agency ('NIA' for short), to investigate a case involving offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 ('UA Act' for short). Accused challenged Home Ministry's Order in Writ Petitions before this Court. The Hon'ble Single Judge, allowed the Writ Petitions and set aside Home Ministry's Order.

3. Feeling aggrieved, Union of India, have filed these two Writ Appeals, challenging common order dated 21.03.2017 passed by the Hon'ble Single Judge in W.Ps.No.7267- 7270/2017 connected with W.P.No.6005/2017, allowing the petitions in part and setting aside order dated 07.12.2016 passed by the Ministry of Home Affairs directing investigation by the National Investigation Agency.

4. For the sake of convenience, parties shall be referred to as per their status in the writ petitions.

5. Relevant facts of the case are, on 16.10.2016, a First Information Report (FIR), was registered in Crime No.124/2016 with the Commercial Street Police Station, Bengaluru, for offences punishable under Sections 302 and 34 IPC. During investigation, police arrested accused No.1 to 4. Based on their statements, accused No.5 was arrested.

6. On 05.11.2016, police filed an application before the learned Magistrate to include Sections 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 ('UA Act' for short) and the learned Magistrate accepted the prayer.

7. By an order dated 07.12.2016, the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, exercising power under Section 6(5) and Section 8 of National Investigation Agency Act ('NIA Act' for short) directed the Superintendent of Police, NIA, Hyderabad to register the case and take up investigation. Accordingly, an FIR bearing No.RC-04/2016- 17 was filed by the NIA.

8. Feeling aggrieved, petitioners presented two writ petitions with following prayers:

(i) to set aside the order dated 05.11.2016 passed by the learned Magistrate permitting to add Sections 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20 of UA Act in the FIR registered as Crime No.124/2016;

(ii) to quash Notification No.11011/33-2016-IS-IV passed by the Ministry of Home Affairs;

(iii) to quash FIR and RC-04/2016-17 registered by NIA for offences punishable under Sections 109, 120B, 201, 150, 153A, 302 read with 34 IPC and Sections 15, 16, 17, 18 and 20 of UA Act; and

(iv) to set aside the order dated 24.1.2017 passed by the Special Court extending minimum investigation period to 180 days.

9. The main grounds urged by the petitioners in support of their writ petitions are:

* that one of the petitioners is the District President of a Social organization called 'Popular Front of India';

* that petitioners are not involved in any anti-social or anti-national activities;

* that inclusion of offences under the UA Act, has maligned the image of the organization; and

* that NIA is meant for investigation of offences affecting sovereignty, security and integrity of India. Therefore, assigning the instant case of a murder to the said Agency amounts to arbitrary exercise of executive power.

10. The Hon'ble Single Judge, by the order impugned, has set aside order dated 07.12.2016 passed by the Ministry of Home Affairs and directed continuance of investigation by the State Police.

11. The Hon'ble Single Judge, rejected the prayer to set aside order dated 05.11.2016 passed by the learned Magistrate permitting inclusion of offences under the UA Act and the prayer to set aside order dated 24.1.2017 passed by the learned Sessions Judge extending the investigation period to 180 days.

12. We have heard Shri Prabhuling K. Navadgi, learned Additional Solicitor General for the Union of India, Shri P. Prasanna Kumar for the National Investigation Agency, Shri V. Sreenidhi for the State Government and S