Petitioners sought direction for State Police to transfer investigation of scheduled offences to NIA under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008. The Court held that State agencies retain power to investigate unless NIA takes over.
null
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND, RANCHI
----
W.P.(Cr.) No. 546 of 2023
----
Md. Aftab Khan @ Aftab Khan and Others .... Petitioners
-- Versus -- The State of Jharkhand and Others .... Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
For the Petitioners :- Mr. Shadab Eqbal, Advocate For the Union of India :- Mr. Anil Kumar, A.S.G.I. For the State :- Mr. Manoj Kumar, Advocate Mr. Deepankar Ray, Advocate For the N.I.A. :- Mr. Amit Kumar Das, Spl.P.P. Mr. Saurav Kumar, Advocate ----
2 /17.08.2023 Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, Mr. Anil Kumar, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Union of India, Mr. Manoj Kumar, the learned counsel along with Mr. Deepankar Ray, the learned vice counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent State and Mr. Amit Kumar Das, the learned counsel along with Mr. Saurav Kumar, the learned vice counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent N.I.A.
2
and under section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, pending before learned S.D.J.M., East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur.
3
statutory sections of other Acts, that does not mean that the case is required to be investigated by the N.I.A.
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.
4
behalf of the petitioners, the subject matter was with regard to the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and that was not the issue. In the Full Bench judgment, the reference was with regard to trial can be conducted by the learned Judicial Magistrate or by the Special Court and in view of that, it has been decided, however, in sub-para(b) of concluding paragraph no.44, it has been held as under:
“44. ….… (B) the case even where offences punishable under the provisions of U.A.P Act are alleged shall be tried by the courts as provided for under the Cr.P.C and not in accordance with the special procedure, under the Act unless (i) he 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.”
warranted.
( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
SI/,
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the State Police must hand over investigation of scheduled offences under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 to NIA upon FIR registration.
Whether sub-section 7 of section 6 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 requires mandatory transfer prior to State investigation.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Bahadur Kora and Others v. The State of Bihar, MANU/BH/0261/2015Distinguished¶5
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Md. Aftab Khan and Others
The State of Jharkhand
Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
