The Government Order from 2012 establishes the NIA Special Court's jurisdiction under Section 22(1) of the NIA Act, negating claims of invalidity due to lack of a specific notification.

ORDER :

1. The present Review Petition has been filed seeking review of the order passed in WPHC 10/2023. The brief facts are that petitioner had filed writ of Habeas Corpus assailing the jurisdiction of NIA Cases Special Court to entertain the proceedings in which the petitioner was arraigned as accused.

2. The illegality of arrest was challenged on the basis of the order of remand being passed by the Special Court when there was no notification under Section 22 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 ('NIA Act' for short).

3. The Division Bench has disposed of the Habeas Corpus petition while adverting to the specific contention raised by the petitioner herein relating to the absence of the notification under Section 22(1) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008. The Division Bench recorded the submission of State Public Prosecutor-2 to the effect that the State Government by order dated 19.07.2012 had established court to deal with cases under the Act and therefore the said order is to be treated to be one under Section 22(1) of the Act and the Special Court alone has the jurisdiction to deal with the matter.

4. The Division Bench has noticed the statutory provision under Sections 11 and 22 of the Act as well as the order of the State Government dated 19.07.2012. It has opined that the order of 19.07.2012 is an order under Section 22(1) of the Act and if that were to be so, there was no infirmity with the order of remand. The Division Bench has held that Section 22(3) of the Act has no application to the present facts. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of, while observing that there was no merit in the writ petition.

5. The present review petition has reiterated the legal contention that no notification was issued by the State Government under Section 22 of the Act. It is contended that the Government Order referred by the Division Bench, there was no reference to Section 22 of the NIA Act and that the Government Order was at the request of the Director General of NIA to provide a Special Court for the purpose of trial of schedule offences by the NIA. Accordingly, it is submitted that this aspect of the matter was not taken note, by the Division Bench.

6. It is further submitted that no Government Order or Notification has been issued by the State Government till date and accordingly, the proceedings of remand are vitiated.

7. It must be noticed that the Division Bench has treated the Notification under Section 11 passed by the State Government on 19.07.2012 as a notification under Section 22 of the Act.

8. The Government Order dated 19.07.2012 reads as under:

"GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.LAW 231, LCE 2010,

BANGALORE, DATED 19TH JULY 2012

In the circumstances explained in the preamble, Government agrees for the establishment of one more Court of Additional City Civil & Sessions Judge (Special Court) to deal with the cases under National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, at Bangalore together with the post of Presiding Officer and following non-gazetted staff.

This order issues with the concurrence of the Finance Department vide U.O. Note No.FD 201 Exp-10/2012, dated 18-06-2012."

9. It is this aspect that is called in question to constitute a ground of review of the order of the Division Bench.

10. During the pendency of the present proceedings, the learned counsel for the State has filed a memo for production of documen