At the stage of framing charges under Section 227 CrPC, the court only needs to establish a prima facie case; complex factual disputes regarding procedural compliance (NIA Act) or sanction validity are matters for trial, and a stay on one charge (Section 124A IPC) does not halt proceedings for other distinct offences.

O R D E R

1. The present Criminal Revision has been preferred under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "Cr.P.C."). The petitioner/accused has invoked the revisional jurisdiction of this Court being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 02.09.2024.

2. The impugned order has been passed by the Seventh Additional Session’s Judge, Ratlam (M.P.) in S.T. Case No.262/15. By way of the said order, the Trial Court has rejected the application filed by the petitioner under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. seeking discharge, and has proceeded to frame charges against him. The charges framed against the petitioner are for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 13(1) and 17 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter "UAPA"), along with Sections 121A , 123, and 124A of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter "IPC"). It is pertinent to mention at the outset that this Court is exercising its limited revisional jurisdiction and not its appellate jurisdiction.

FACTS IN BRIEF

3. The factual matrix, as discernible from the record and strictly necessary for the adjudication of the present revision, is that the petitioner has been implicated in Crime No.170/2015 registered at Police Station Industrial Area, Ratlam, Madhya Pradesh. According to the prosecution, on 17.04.2015, the Station House Officer of Police Station Manakchowk visited the residence of one Imran Khan situated at 230, Mohan Nagar, Ratlam, for the seizure of certain articles in connection with another crime (Crime No. 213/2015). During the search, the police allegedly recovered certain incriminating booklets.

4. The prosecution asserts that the contents of these booklets amounted to an attempt to wage war against the State. Consequently, a Dehati Nalsi was recorded, which culminated in the registration of the present FIR bearing Crime No. 170/2015. Upon completion of the investigation, the police filed a final report (Challan) under Section 173 of the CrPC against the petitioner and other co-accused before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, and the matter was subsequently committed to the Sessions Court.

5. Initially, the Trial Court framed charges vide order dated 02.04.2016. This order was challenged by the petitioner before this Court in CRR/567/2016. Vide order dated 24.09.2019, this Court remanded the matter back to the Trial Court with a specific direction to consider the petitioner’s objection regarding the non- compliance of the mandatory provisions of Section 6 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (hereinafter "NIA Act").

6. Following the remand, the petitioner filed an application under Section 227 of the CrPC on 24.10.2019 seeking discharge. During its pendency, the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed an interim order dated 11.05.2022 in W.P.(Civil) 682/2021 ( S.G. Vombatkere Vs. Union of India ) regarding Section 124A of the IPC. Relying on this, the petitioner filed another application on 10.11.2022. The Trial Court, vide the impugned order dated 02.09.2024, rejected the discharge application, leading to the present revision.

CONTENTIONS OF THE REVISIONIST

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the Trial Court erred in law and on facts by rejecting the discharge application. It was contended that the Trial Court ought to have first decided the application dated 10.11.2022 seek