UNION OF INDIA Vs. B N ANANTI PADMANABIAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These three appeals are by certificate from the Judgment and order dated 31 March, 1969 of the High Court of Assam and Nagaland.

(2.) These three appeals arise out of special cases Nos. 16 and 16-A of 1964 pending in the Court of the Special Judge, Gauhati. In Special Case No. 16 of 1964 Major J.S. Prosad, B.N. Ananthapadamanabhiah and Motiur Rahman were Charged under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 5(2) , 5 (1) (c) and 5(1) (d) of the prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and Section 467/471 of the Indian Penal Code. In special Case No. 16-A of 1964 charges were framed against S. Chartterjee and Motiur Rahman under Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code read with Ss. 5(2) , 5 (1) (c) and 5(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Sections 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The appellants filed three separate criminal revision petitions in the High Court. Four contentions were advanced before the High Court. First, that the Special Judge at Gauhati had no jurisdiction to try offences investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment as the Delhi Special Establishment Act was not extended to NEFA. Secondly, that under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act the Delhi Special Police Establishment cannot investigate in a case in any area which is not a Union territory or a railway area without the consent of the Government of the State. It was contended that the consent of the Government of Assam was not taken. Thirdly, the investigation was carried out by an Inspector of Police under Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, under an order of an Magistrate of the First class at Delhi, but the Magistrate did not apply his mind to the matter and mechanically gave the permission. Fourthly, no sanction was taken under Section 196-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure before cognisance was taken by the Court.