Back
2007(3) JLJ 14
Deepak Verma and R.C. Mishra, JJ.
Balram Mehani and others v. State of M.P.
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 10496 of 2005 (Jabalpur):
on reference in case reported in 2006(2) JLJ 233;
Decided on 11.10.2006.
Whether the provisions of section 105A to 105L, incorporated in Chapter VIIA of the Code of Criminal Procedure, are applicable only to the territories which are foreign territories and in which by reciprocal agreement provisions of the Code are made applicable or the provisions are applicable within the territories of India also? [Para 6
Held: Critical examination of sections 105A to 105L falling in Chapter VIIA of the Code would make it abundantly clear that they have been incorporated with an intention to curb mischief or completely eliminate terrorist activities and international crimes, otherwise there was no reason to have enacted Chapter VIIA in the Code. Provisions of this Chapter are in effect supplemental to the special provisions contained in section 166A and 166B and have nothing to do with investigation into offences in general.
There is yet another reason for coming to the aforesaid conclusion that Chapter VIIA of the Code applies only to terrorist activities or to international crime. The reason is that in no other section or provision in the Code, the words "where the Court in India ..." have been used. These words have direct relevance with the definition of contracting States. Contracting State has been defined as a country through a treaty or otherwise. The conjoint reading of the definition of "Contracting State" and other provisions of Chapter VIIA of the Code, would show that the same can be invoked only with regard to crime or such criminal activities within those two countries between whom reciprocal arrangements exist or treaties have been executed and not for those offences which are committed within the territory of India. 2006(2) JLJ 229 approved. 2006(2) JLJ 233 overruled. [Paras 29 & 30
(2) Interpretation of Statutes -- language of statute clear -- recourse to statement of objects and reasons or any other aid to construction not permissible. AIR 1984 SC 684 followed. [Para 14
(3) Law -- does not operate in a vacuum -- it is powerful instrument fashioned by society for purpose of adjusting conflicts and tensions -- it intends to serve a social purpose. AIR 1982 SC 149 followed. [Para 14
(4) Criminal P.C., 1973 -- S.156 and Chap. VIIA -- Judicial Magistrates had no power in respect of investigation which is carried out by police -- now such powers are available in Chap. VIIA. AIR 1970 SC 786 followed.
[Para 16
(5) Criminal P.C., 1973 -- S.166A -- issuance of Letter Rogatory-opportunity of hearing the accused need not be provided. 1993 Supp.(4) SCC 260 followed. [Para 22
(6) Criminal P.C., 1973 -- S.166A -- provision -- cannot be supplemented by any other procedure -- any violation to the procedure would render proceedings improper and unfair resulting in miscarriage of justice. 2002 CrLJ 3026 (Mad.) relied on. [Para 23
(7) Criminal P.c., 1973 -- Ss.166A, 166B and Chap. VIIA -- inclusion of Chap. VIIA -- is to give full and complete effect to provisions contained in Ss.166A and 166B. [Para 25
(8) Interpretation of Statutes -- heading -- generally regarded as a preamble to the section which follows under it -- it is considered as a part the Act itself. AIR 1959 SC 90 followed. [ Para 27
¼1½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 105d ls 105B] v/;k; 7d] /kkjk 166d rFkk 166[k & mica/kksa dk vf/kfu;eu fjf"V ds fu;a=.k ;k vkardoknh xfrfof/k;k¡ lekIr djus ds fy, fd;k x;k gS && v/;k; 7d ds mic/ak /kkkjk 166d rFkk 166[k ds iwjd gSa&& dsoy mu nks ns‘kksa ds Hkhrj vijk/k ds laca/k esa vkJ; fy;k tk ldrk gS ftuds e/; laf/k;k¡ fu"ikfnr dh xbZ gS && Hkkjr ds Hkhrj dkfjr vijk/kksa dk ykxw ugha gSA
ÞD;k naM izfØ;k lafgrk ds v/;k; 7d ds lefo"V /kkjk 105d ls 105B ds mica/k dsoy mu {ks=ksa dks ykxw gSa tks fons‘kh jkT;{ks= gSa vkSj ftuesa ikjEifjd le>kSrs }kjk lafgrk ds mica/k ykxw fd, x, gS ;k ;g mica/k Hkkjr ds jkT;{ks= ds Hkhrj Hkh ykxw gSaA\ß
¿ iSjk 6À
vfHkfu/kkZfjr % lafgrk ds v/;k; 7d esa fo|eku /kkjk 105d ls 105B ds foospukRed ijh{k.k ls ;g iw.kZr% Li"V gksxk fd os fjf"V fu;af=r djus vFkok vkardoknh xfrfof/k;k¡ vkSj varjjk"Vªh; vijk/k iw.kZr% lekIr djus ds vk‘k; esa lekfo"V dh xbZ gSA vU;Fkk lafgrk ds v/;k; 7d ds vf/kfu;eu dk dksbZ dkj.k ugha FkkA bl v/;k; ds mica/k] izHkko esa /kkjk 166d rFkk 166[k esa varfoZ"V fo‘ks"k mica/kksa ds iwjd gSA lkekU; vijk/kksa ds vUos"k.k ls budk dksbZ laca/k ugha gSA
lafgrk dk v/;k; 7d dsoy vkardoknh xfrfof/k;k¡ vkSj varjjk"Vªh; vijk/k dks ykxw gS] iwoksZDr bl fu"d"kZ ij igq¡pus ds fy, ,d vU; dkj.k Hkh gSA og dkj.k ;g gS fd ‘‘kCn Þtgk¡ Hkkjr dk dksbZ U;k;ky; && ß lafgrk esa vU;= dgha Hkh iz;qDr ugha fd, x, gSaA bu ‘‘kCnksa dh lafonkdkjh jkT;ksa dh ifjHkk"kk ls izR;{k lqlaxfr gSA lafonkdkjh jkT; dh ifjHkk"kk laf/k ds ek/;e vFkok vU;Fkk ns‘k dh Hkk¡fr dh xbZ gSA Þlafonkdkjh jkT;ß dh ifjHkk"kk vkSj lafgrk ds v/;k; 7d ds vU; mica/kksa ds lkFk&lkFk iBu ls nf‘kZr gksxk fd mudk vkJe dsoy bu nks ns‘kks ds Hkhrj vijk/k vFkok ,slh vkijkf/kd xfrfof/k;ksa ds laca/k esa fy;k tk ldrk gS ftuds e/; ikjLifjd O;oLFkk fo|eku gS ;k laf/k;k¡ fu"ikfnr dh xbZ gS] Hkkjr ds jkT;{ks= ds Hkhrj dkfjr vijk/kksa ds fy, ughaA 2006¼2½ ts ,y ts 229 vuqeksfnrA 2006¼2½ ts ,y ts 233 myVk x;kA ¿ iSjk 29 ,oa 30À
¼2½ fof/k dk fuoZpu && dkuwu dh Hkk"kk Li"V && mÌs‘;ksa vkSj dkj.kksa ds dFku ;k fuoZpu ds fy, vU; lk/ku dk vkJ; ughaA , vkb vkj 1984 ,l lh 684 vuqlfjrA
¿ iSjk 14À
¼3½ fof/k && ‘kwU; esa izofrZr ugha gksrh && la?k"kZ vkSj ruko ds lek/kku ds iz;kstu ds fy, lekt }kjk fufeZr ;g ‘kfDr&lEiUu lk/ku gS && bldk vk‘k; lkekftd iz;kstu esa lgk;d gksrk gSA , vkb vkj 1982 ,l lh 149 vuqlfjrA
¿ iSjk 14À
¼4½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 156 rFkk v/;k; 7d && iqfyl }kjk fd, tkus okys vUos"k.k ds ckjs esa U;kf;d eftLVªVksa dks dksbZ ‘kfDr ugha Fkh && vc v/;k; 7d ds oSlh ‘kfDr;k¡ miyC/k gSaA , vkb vkj 1970 ,l lh 786 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 16À
¼5½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 166d && vuqjks/k&i= tkjh fd;k tkuk && vfHk;qDr dks lquokbZ dk volj djk;k tkuk vko‘;d ughaA 1993¼4½ ,l lh lh 260 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 22À
¼6½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 166d && mica/k && fdlh vU; izfØ;k }kjk deh iwjh ugha dh tk ldrh && izfØ;k dk dSlk&Hkh mYya?ku] dk;Zokgh dks vuqfpr vkSj v_tq cuk nsxk ftldk ifj.kke U;k;gkfu gksxkA 2002 lhvkj ,y ts 3026 ¼enzkl½ voyafcrA ¿ iSjk 23À
¼7½ naM izfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 && /kkjk 166d] 166[k rFkk v/;k; 7d && v/;k; 7d dk lekos‘k && /kkjk 166d rFkk 166[k esaa varfo"V mica/kksa dks laiw.kZ vkSj lexz izHkko iznku fd, tkus ds fy, fd;k x;k gSA ¿ iSjk 25À
¼8½ fof/k dk fuoZpu && ‘kh"kZd && lkekU;r% blds v/khu vkus okyh /kkjk dh mn~nsf‘kdk ekuk tkrk gS && ;g vf/kfu;e dk gh Hkkx ekuk tkrk gSA , vkb vkj 1959 ,l lh 90 vuqlfjrA ¿ iSjk 27À
Verma, -- 1. This order shall also govern disposal of MCrC No.10497/ 2005 (Shankar Mihani and others v. State of M.P.) and MCRC No. 10538/ 2005 (Jitendra Bhmvsar and others v. State of M.P.) as common question of law as to applicability of the provisions of Chapter VIIA of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") is involved in all the aforesaid petitions.
2. The Station House Officer, Police Station Itarsi, moved applications before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Itarsi for initiating proceedings against the petitioners under Chapter VIIA of the Code and to pass appropriate orders for attachment and forfeiture of the properties which could be identified to have been derived from or used in commission of offence and out of their criminal activities. According to police, petitioners were involved in criminal activities since long and had accumulated huge wealth derived directly or indirectly by or such criminal and unlawful activities. According to police, the same were held either in their names or in the names of their relatives, which were required to be traced out and identified. Hence, a prayer was made by police for a direction under section 1050 of the Code, authorizing them to take all necessary steps for tracing out and identifying such properties. Almost on identical facts, similar proceedings were initiated against other petitioners in the aforesaid connected MCrCs.
3. According to petitioners, police was harassing and humiliating them and were trampling upon their rights guaranteed to them under the Constitution of India. Thus, they were constrained to move this Court with a prayer to exercise the inherent jurisdiction conferred on this Court under section 482 of the Code.
4. During the pendency of these petitions at the main seat, while considering an identical matter registered as MCrC No.1042/2006 (Ashok v. State of M.P.) reported in 2006(2) JLJ 229, at Indore, learned Single (.A. Shah, J .), in his order dated 28.3.2006 took the view that the pt6visions of section 105C, 105D and 105G as appearing in Chapter VIIA of the Code apply to the territories which are foreign territories and in which by reciprocal arrangements, provisions thereof are made applicable.
5. These connected matters came up for consideration at the main seat before learned Single Bench (Rakesh Shaksena, J.) [Balram Mihalli and others v. State of M.P] reported in 2006(2) JLJ 233. While advancing arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioners placed reliance on the ,following observations made by W.A. Shah, 1. in the matter of AS/10k (supra).
"6. It appears that the learned Magistrate had passed the order impugned under the provisions of sections 105C, 1050 and 105G of the Code. The order impugned does not show that the learned Magistrate ever considered the provisions of section 105 of the Code applies only in cases where there is reciprocal arrangement with the foreign countries for extension of Code of Criminal Procedure to their territories. These provisions under section 105 as well as provisions applied by the Magistrate only apply to the territories which are foreign territories and in which by reciprocal arrangement, provisions of the Code are applicable. Under these circumstances, the impugned order which the learned Magistrate passed is clearly without jurisdiction as the provisions to which he has resorted are not available to be applied to the local areas."
6. However, after hearing both the parties, learned Single Judge (Rakesh Saksena, J.), expressed his disagreement with the view taken by W.A. Shah, J. in the aforesaid matter of Ashok (supra), by observing that section 105A to 105J of the Code apply to the local area in India as well as to the foreign territories in which by reciprocal arrangements, provisions of the Code are made applicable and referred the following question for a decision by a larger Bench. Hon'ble Chief Justice was pleased to assign the job to this Bench. That is how the matte
SupremeToday
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
