IMPORTANT POINTS
1. Section 7 of wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 empowering the Central Govt. to authorise any officer for the purpose of the act of 1933 so far as the search of the unauthorised wireless sets are concerned does not prohibit the statutory power of the police under Section 156 of the Cr. P.C. of investigation of a cognizable offence and the power under the other provisions of the Cr. P.C in the matter of seizure.
2. Although offence under Section 6(1-A) of the wireless' Telegraphy Act, 1933 is cognizable and the offence under section 20(1) of the Telegraph Act, 1885 is non-cognizable by virtue of Section 20(2) of Act of 1885, however by virtue of Section 15.5(4) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 wherein if a case relates to two or more offences of which one is cognizable then, notwithstanding the fact that the other offence is non-cognizable; the case shall be deemed to be a cognizable offence.

JUDGMENT

N.N. Mathur, J. - By way of this Special Criminal Application under Section .482 of Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioners seek direction to quash Cr. No. II/70/95 registered with Ranavav Police Station, Porbandar for offences under Sections 6(1) and (1-A) of the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1933') and Section 20(1) of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1885').

2. Twin contentions raised in this Special Criminal Application Is firstly, whether In view of Section 20(2) of the Act of 1885, the offence being non-cognizable investigation by the police and proceedings thereof are illegal and void and secondly, whether in view of Section 7 of the Act of 1993, which gives power of search only to officer specially empowered by the Central Government, vitiates the entire proceedings conducted at the hands of the local police?

3. The contention requires consideration in the backdrop of following facts of the case.

Petitioners are running a firm in the name of M/s. Veearsons. The said firm is engaged in electronic business and deal with various electronic items.

The firm is also the distributors of Motorolla Company which manufactures cellular phones as well as wireless sets and various other electronic items. Mr. V.D. Gohil, Police Sub-Inspector, Ranavav Police Station visited the premises of Saurashtra Cement Ltd. on 20-9-1995, for varifying the enquiry papers in Enquiry Case No. 68 of 1995, wherein near the Control Room he noticed that one person named Ramlingam Paramguru was in possession of one walkie-talkie. He was also found using Motorolla Wireless Set. The Police Sub-Inspector suspected that it was without licence, and therefore he enquired from, the said person as to whether he had any licence authorising him to possess the said wireless set, whereupon the said' person replied in negative. The P.S.I seized the said wireless set. On further investigation five more walkie-talkie wireless sets of radius of GP 300 type worth Rs.1,50,000/- Of - and 16 old walkie-talkie sets of type of C-5020 worth Rs. 80,000/- manufactured by Electronic Corporation of India Ltd. were produced by the Instrumentation Manager and Control Room In charge of the Company. As no bill or documents in support of the said articles were produced, they were seized under Section 102 of the Cr. P.C. On further investigation" it revealed that the said Six Motorolla GP 300 walkie-taklie wireless sets were supplied to Saurashtra Cement Ltd., by M/s. Veearsons. Ahmedabad for which payment was made by cheque dated 27-7-1995 for an amount of Rs. 62.00 of. It also revealed that Saurashtra Cements do not have the requisite licence under Section 3 of the Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act. 1933 for possessing wireless sets, The supplies of the said wireless sets i.e.. M/s. Veersons was also not having the licence. It was also disclosed that M/s. Veerasons were getting wireless sets of Motorolla from Adino Telecom Ltd. Bombay and Veearsons was working as distributors of Adino Telecom Ltd. of Bombay. Adino Telecom Ltd. of Bombay had demonstration licence dated 20-12-1994 valid up to 30-9-1995 which had been extended till 30-9-1996 for possessing, dealing in and demo Dstrating Motorolla Wireless Sets of GP 300 i.e. handsets (eight sets) and Motorolla wireless sets of G.P. 300 i.e. bare sets (eight sets). It was also disclosed that it was on the strength of licence of Adino telecom, M/s Veearsons was not only operating but also advising its customers, of wireless sets to operate. Thus, according to the police, the various parties committed offence under the) Acts of 1885 and of 1933 as follows:

(1) Saurashtra Cement Ltd. Committed offence under Sections 6(1) & 6(1-A) of Indian Wireless Telegraphy Act, 1933 by possessing trans-receiver wireless sets of Motorolla GP 300 and of ECIL, with the licence to possess the same under Section 3 of the Act and they also committed offence under Secti