IQBAL GAZI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeal under Section 12 of Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred as MCOCA) r/w Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred challenging the order dated 29th July, 2013 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge whereby on the application moved by the complainant under Section 9 of the MCOCA r/w Section 319 Cr.P.C., FIR was ordered to be registered against the appellants.

(2.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that Section 9 of MCOCA does not give any power to the Court to give direction to register FIR and this Section provides for taking cognizance of an offence by the Special Court of MCOCA. Passing of the order by the learned Sessions Judge to register FIR does not amount to taking cognizance. Hence, the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge is not maintainable. Moreover, under Section 23(1)(a) of MCOCA, 1999, the information of commission of any organized crime shall not be recorded without prior approval of the police officer not below the rank of the Additional Commissioner of Police.

(3.) Per contra, it was submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State that a Special Judge being court of original jurisdiction has power under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to order investigation and investigation cannot be done without registration of FIR. Reliance was placed on Mohd. Yousuf vs. Afaq Jahan (Smt.) and Anr., 2006 1 SCC 627. Furthermore, registration of FIR was not a mechanical exercise and it was registered only after obtaining the requisite sanction. By relying upon R.N. Aggarwal vs. R.C. Bansal and Ors., 2014 12 JT 79 and Dr. A.S. Narayana Rao vs. CBI, WP (Crl.) 1626/2011, it was submitted that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity which calls for interference. As such, the appeal is liable to be dismissed.