IN REFERENCE OF STATE OF CHHATTISGARH vs BHUPENDRA VISHWAKARMA

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 22508

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi, J
IN REFERENCE OF STATE OF CHHATTISGARH – Appellant
Versus
BHUPENDRA VISHWAKARMA – Respondent
CRREF No. 1 of 2026

Important Points

Jurisdiction of the Special Court (NIA) over offences under Sections 489-A to 489-E of the IPC is not dependent on the 2019 Amendment, as these were already scheduled offences under the original NIA Act, 2008.

Subject

Criminal Law - Jurisdiction

Act Referred

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: S.436(2)
Indian Penal Code: S.489-A, S.34, S.489-C, S.489-E
National Investigation Agency Act, 2008: S.2(1)(g)

Headnote

The matter involves a reference under Section 436(2) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, regarding the trial of offences under Sections 489-A and 489-C of the Indian Penal Code. The case was transferred from the Sessions Court, Surajpur, to the Special Court (NIA), Bilaspur, and subsequently to the Special Court (NIA), Ambikapur. However, the Special Court (NIA), Ambikapur, returned the case to the Sessions Court, Surajpur, ruling that it lacked jurisdiction because the alleged offence occurred prior to the enforcement of the National Investigation Agency (Amendment) Act, 2019. The primary issue was whether the Special Court (NIA), Ambikapur, is competent to try the case given that the offence predates the 2019 Amendment. The Court reasoned that a plain reading of the Schedule to the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, as it existed prior to the 2019 Amendment, clearly shows that offences under Sections 489-A to 489-E of the IPC were already listed as scheduled offences under S.No. 8(b). The 2019 Amendment merely re-numbered existing entries to incorporate additional offences and did not introduce these specific IPC sections for the first time. The order dated 15.10.2025 passed by the learned Special Court (NIA), Ambikapur in Special Case (NIA) No.35/2024 holding that it lacked jurisdiction to try the present case, is unsustainable in law and is hereby set aside.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: D.R. Minj
For the Respondents: Sunil Verma, Chain Singh Paraste

Table of Content
1. procedural history and the emergence of a jurisdictional dispute between the sessions court and the special nia court. (Para 1)
2. determination that the special court's jurisdiction is based on the original nia act, not the 2019 amendment, for ipc sections 489-a to 489-e. (Para 10)
3. setting aside the lower court's order and directing the trial to proceed in the special court (nia), ambikapur. (Para 11)

Order on Board

This reference has been preferred by the Principal District & Sessions Judge, Surajpur under Section 436(2) of BNSS, 2023 in respect of Crime No.483/2017 for the offence under Sections 489-A read with 34, 489-C of IPC. {registered as Special Case (NIA) No.14/2021 in Special Court, Bilaspur and Special Case (NIA) No.35/2024 in Special Court, Ambikapur}, for decision on the following questions of law:

“1. Whether the present case is triable by the learned Special Court (NIA), Ambikapur?

2. If the answer is in the affirmative, it is prayed that the case be transferred to the said Special Court for trial.

3. If the present case is triable by Sessions Court, Surajpur, whether it is necessary to conduct the trial afresh (de novo), or whether the proceedings/trial already conducted by the learned Special Court (NIA), Bilaspur and the learned Special Court (NIA), Ambikapur may be treated as a continuation of the trial and be proceeded with from the stage already reached?”

02. Facts, in brief, giving rise to making of this reference are that accused persons have been charged with offences under Sections 489-A read with Section 34 and 489-C of IPC. The First Information Report was registered on 08.11.2017. Upon completion of the investigation, the Police Station-Surajpur, filed charge-sheet before the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Surajpur. After committal, the case was tried by the Court of the Third Additional Sessions Judge, Surajpur, where charges were framed against the accused persons and the statements of a total of nine prosecution witnesses were recorded. Thereafter, in light of the National Investigation Agency (Amendment) Act, 2019, the case was transferred to the Court of the Special Judge (NIA), Bilaspur. The learned Special Court (NIA), Bilaspur, recommenced the proceedings, framed charges afresh against the accused persons, and recorded the statements of two witnesses. Subsequently, in view of Notification No. 3406/3100/XXI-B/C.G.2024 dated 24.09.2024 issued by the Law and Legislative Affairs Department, Government of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, all cases relating to districts falling within the territorial jurisdiction of the Special Court (NIA), Surguja (Ambikapur) were transferred for trial to the said Court by the Special Court (NIA), Bilaspur. Accordingly, the present case was also transferred to the Special Court (NIA), Surguja (Ambikapur).

03. The Special Court (NIA), Surguja (Ambikapur), registered the matter as a Special Case (NIA) No.35/2024 and, after taking into consideration the proceedings already conducted by the Special Court (NIA), Bilaspur, continued with the trial and recorded the statements of three additional witnesses. Thus, the statements of a total of twelve witnesses have been recorded in the case. However, by order dated 15.10.2025 the learned Special Court (NIA), Surguja (Ambikapur), observed that the alleged offence had been committed prior to 25 July 2019, i.e., before the National Investigation Agency (Amendment) Act, 2019 came into force, and therefore held that it lacked jurisdiction to try the case. Accordingly, it ordered that the case be remitted/transferred back to Sessions Court, Surajpur, within whose territorial jurisdiction the cause of action arose. Hence the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Surajpur, has made this reference for decision on the questions of law mentioned in the opening paragraph of this order.

04. While making this reference, the learned Sessions Judge, Surajpur observed that the Amendment Act, 2019 came