Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
Maulana Kaleem Siddiqui – Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy.Home Lko. – Respondent
CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 5425 of 2022
Decided on : 27-05-2022
NIA Act - Bail Application - Section 21
Fact of the Case:
The court heard a bail application under the NIA Act. The State raised a preliminary objection citing Section 21 of the NIA Act, stating that the bail application should have been filed before a division bench.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the bail application was maintainable under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. as the case had not been notified to the Central Government as required under Section 6 of the NIA Act.
Issues: The issues revolved around the compliance with Section 6 of the NIA Act, the establishment of Special Courts, and the jurisdiction for hearing the bail application.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the bail application was maintainable under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. as the case had not been notified to the Central Government as required under Section 6 of the NIA Act.
Final Decision: The bail application was dismissed with liberty to file an application for appeal under Section 21 of the NIA Act before the appropriate bench.
JUDGMENT :
KRISHAN PAHAL, J.
1. Heard Sri I.B. Singh, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ishan Baghel, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Shiv Nath Tilhari, learned A.G.A.-I for the State and perused the material available on record.
2. At the outset, learned A.G.A.-I for the State has raised a preliminary objection that the present bail is not maintainable as it cannot be heard before this Court as it is hit by Section 21 of The National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as “the NIA Act”). An appeal ought to have been filed on behalf of the applicant under Section 21 of the NIA Act to be heard by a division bench.
3. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has pressed the bail application on the ground that trial of the case by Special Court without following Section 6 of the NIA Act is illegal. The case has not been notified to the Central Government as provided under Section 6 of the NIA Act, which is being reproduced herein below :-
(2) On receipt of the report under sub-section (1), the State Government shall forward the report to the Central Government as expeditiously as possible.
(3) On receipt of report from the State Government, the Central Government shall determine on the basis of information made available by the State Government or received from other sources, within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the report, whether the offence is a Scheduled Offence or not and also whether, having regard to the gravity of the offence and other relevant factors, it is a fit case to be investigated by the Agency.
(4) Where the Central Government is of the opinion that the offence is a Scheduled Offence and it is a fit case to be investigated by the Agency, it shall direct the Agency to investigate the said offence.
(5) Notwithstanding anything contained in this section, if the Central Government is of the opinion that a Scheduled Offence has been committed which is required to be investigated under this Act, it may, suo motu, direct the Agency to investigate the said offence.
(6) Where any direction has been given under sub-section (4) or sub-section (5), the State Government and any police officer of the State Government investigating the offence shall not proceed with the investigation and shall forthwith transmit the relevant documents and records to the Agency.
(7) For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that till the Agency takes up the investigation of the case, it shall be the duty of the officer-in-charge of the police station to continue the investigation.
(8) Where the Central Government is of the opinion that a Scheduled Offence has been committed at any place outside India to which this Act extends, it may direct the Agency to register the case and take up investigation as if such offence has been committed in India.
(9) For the purposes of sub-section (8), the Special Court at New Delhi shall have the jurisdiction.”
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the applicant has placed much reliance on the judgment of this Court dated 26.2.2019 passed in Vineet Kumar Dixit vs. State of U.P., Bail No. 8778 of 2018 wherein it has been opined after relying on the judgments of Patna High Court and Rajasthan High Court, that the cases even where scheduled offences punishable under the provisions of Schedule have been alleged, shall be tried by the courts as provided for under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and not in accordance with the special procedure provided under the Act unless (i) The investigation of such cases is entrusted by the Central Government to the N.I.A. and (ii) The N.I.A. transfers the same to the investigating agency of State Government. The special procedure under the NIA Act would attract only when the Central Govern
The main legal point established is that the bail application under the NIA Act is maintainable under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. if the case has not been notified to the Central Government as require....
Bail applications under UAPA must be appealed to a Division Bench under Section 21 of the NIA Act, not maintained before the High Court.
Scheduled offence – All offences under UAPA, Special Court alone has exclusive jurisdiction to try such offences.
Scheduled offences under the U.A.P.A. Act are exclusively triable by Special Courts set up under the N.I.A. Act, and appeals from their judgments, sentences, or orders are to be heard by the Division....
An application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging a Special Court's refusal to discharge is not maintainable; remedies are available under Section 21(1) of the NIA Act.
The main legal point established is the entitlement to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and the legislative mandate that offences under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 are to ....
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C is an indefeasible right once the statutory period for filing the charge sheet/challan has lapsed, and offences under UAPA are to be tried exclus....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
