SHIV KUMAR SHARMA
Vaman Narayan Ghiya – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.-On the allegations of committing theft and illegally exporting the monuments and statues from various temples and other protected placed of archaeological importance, Police Station Vidhyadhar Nagar Jaipur City arrested petitioner in criminal case bearing FIR No. 146/2003 under Sections 379, 411, 413, 414, 401, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and 3/25(1), 5, 14/25(2) of the Antiquities & Art Treasures Act 1972 (for short ‘AAT Act’) and submitted charge sheet in the court of Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) cum Judicial Magistrate No. 21, Jaipur City. The petitioner by moving application under Section 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short ‘CrPC’) read with Section 26 AAT Act raised objections as to the jurisdiction of the Magistrate to take cognizance of offence under AAT Act. It was interalia stated in the application that in view of Section 26 of AAT Act, only an officer authorised by the Central Govt. could institute the complaint and investigation for the offences under AAT Act could not be undertaken by the Police. Therefore, the order taking cognizance for the offence under AAT Act was without jurisdiction. The order da
Hashad S. Mehta vs. CBI (III (1992) CCR 2793
State of M.P. vs. Bhoora Ji (2001(7) SCC 679
Ballabh Das Agarwala vs. J.C. Chakravorty
Union of India vs. Prakash Hinduja
Jaswant Singhv. State of Punjab
Praveen Chand Modyv. State of A.P.
State ofOrissav. Sharat Chandra Sahu
Udai Mohan Lal Acharya vs. State of Maharashtra
Joginder Singh vs. State of Punjab
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.