Dismissed

Mohammed Sarvar Azmi @ Dhila Pappu S/O Shri Mohammed Hanif v. State of Rajasthan

Rajasthan HC18 Jul 2023CRLAD/136/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench held that an appeal filed under Section 21 of the NIA Act is not maintainable because the offence was registered prior to the Act's enactment and was not investigated by the NIA. Consequently, the NIA Act's provisions do not apply.

What did the court decide?

The criminal appeal was dismissed as not maintainable.

Mohammed Sarvar Azmi @ Dhila Pappu S/O Shri… — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Rajasthan HC (2023)

¶1

[2023:RJ-JP:14511-DB]

¶2

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 136/2023

¶4

Mohammed Sarvar Azmi @ Dhila Pappu S/o Shri Mohammed Hanif, R/o Post Chand Patti, Tehsil Sagadi Police Station Ronapar, District Ajamgarh (Uttar Pradesh) (Presently Confined In Central Jail, Jaipur Arrested On 25.12.2019)

¶5

----Appellant

¶6

Versus

¶7

State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor

¶8

----Respondent

¶9

For Appellant(s) : Mr. Syed Saadat Ali Mr. Siddharth Satija through VC Mr. Tusharika Mattoo though VC

¶10

For State : Mr. Rajesh Maharshi, AAG with Mr. Devanshu Saini

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PANKAJ BHANDARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BHUWAN GOYAL

¶12

Order

¶13

18/07/2023

¶14

The matter comes up on defect pointed out by the Registry. As per objection pointed out, provision of law is incorrect in the subject matter and as per section of NIA Act, this criminal appeal does not seem to be proper.

¶15

It is contended by Mr. Siddharth Satija, counsel appearing for appellant that as per Section 22(3) of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008(hereinafter referred to as ‘Act’) the jurisdiction conferred by this Act on a Special Court shall, until a Special Court is designated by the State Government under sub-section(1) in the case of any offence punishable under this Act, notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, would be exercised by the Court

¶16

[2023:RJ-JP:14511-DB]

¶17

[CRLAD-136/2023]

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

of Session of the division in which such offence has been committed. It is argued that as per Section 21 of the Act, appeal lies to the Division Bench of the High Court against all orders passed by Special Court.

¶20

Counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon Bikramjit Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2020 SCC Online SC 824; Gopal Krishna Patar @ Raja Peter vs The State of Jharkhand & Ors., 2018 SCC Online Jhar 812 and Lt. Col. Prasad Shrikant Agency & Ors. vs National Investigation Agency & Ors., 2011 SCC Online Bom 1734 .

¶21

Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for State has opposed the appeal. It is contended that the present appeal is not maintainable. It is also contended that as per Section 13 of Act, jurisdiction of Special Courts has been prescribed according to which, every Scheduled Offence investigated by the Agency shall be tried only by the Special Court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. It is argued that Special Court has been defined under Section 2(h) of Act, as per which ‘Special Court’ means (a Court of Session designated as Special Court) under Section 11 or, as the case may be, under Section 22 of Act. The crux of the argument of counsel is that offence has not been investigated by NIA and the matter is not pending before Special Court constituted under the Act, hence, provisions of NIA Act, 2008 would not have any applicability to the case.

¶22

We have considered the contentions.

¶23

We have gone through the impugned order, the facts of the case are that FIR was registered on 13.05.2008, which is prior to the enactment of NIA Act i.e. 31.12.2008. Section 13 of the NIA

¶24

[2023:RJ-JP:14511-DB]

¶25

[CRLAD-136/2023]

¶26

Act specifically provides that every scheduled offence which is investigated by the Agency shall be tried only by the Special Court. In the present case, investigation was not done by the National Investigation Agency and thus, provisions of NIA Act would not have any applicability.

¶27

Taking note of the fact that the matter has not been investigated by the National Investigation Agency and the matter is not pending before Special Court designated under the NIA Act, the provisions of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 would not have any applicability. The judgments cited by counsel for the appellant do not have any applicability to the facts of the present case. In view of the office objection, the appeal being wrongly filed before Division Bench, is dismissed as not maintainable.

¶28

(BHUWAN GOYAL),J

¶29

(PANKAJ BHANDARI),J

¶30

HEENA/08

Mohammed Sarvar Azmi @ Dhila Pappu S/O Shri Mohammed Hanif v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Sarvar Azmi @ Dhila Pappu S/O Shri Mohammed Hanif v. State of Rajasthan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ramveer S/O Jagdish Vs State of Rajasthan

Pintu S/O Kamal Vs State of Rajasthan

Waseem S/O Shaukat Vs State of Rajasthan

State of Rajasthan Vs Suresh Kumar S/O Shri Mangilal

Suresh Kumar Son of Shri Mangilal Vs State of Rajasthan

Vikaram Son of Shri Chain Singh Vs State of Rajasthan