MUFTI ABDUS SAMI QADMI Vs. NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the order dated 14.12.2016 by which an application filed by the appellant herein, seeking a direction to supply the copy/inspection of documents submitted by the prosecution in sealed covers, was dismissed. The appellant had sought copies of the report filed by the Public Prosecutor under Sec. 43D (2) (b) of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. The prayer made by the appellant was rejected by the District & Sessions Judge, Special Court (NIA) by the impugned order.

(2.) Counsel for the appellant submits that the aforesaid document is a vital document to enable him to prepare his defence and even otherwise there is no law which can deny the appellant copies of the aforesaid report filed by the Public Prosecutor.

(3.) Mr. Sharma, learned Special Public Prosecutor, submits that the present appeal is not maintainable under Sec. 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 (in short 'NIA Act') as no appeal lies against an interim/interlocutory order. Additionally, it is contended that in this case having regard to the nature of the matter and the investigation required, the charge-sheet could not be filed within the statutory period of 90 days, which could be extended for a period of 180 days. Learned counsel while relying upon Sec. 43D of the Act submits that the requirement as per this section was that the Public Prosecutor is to place a report before the court detailing reasons for the delay in seeking extension from 90 days to 180 days in filing the charge-sheet. Mr. Sharma, submits that after the application was filed the Special Judge by an order dated 29.04.2016 granted the extension to which there was no opposition. Neither a copy of the report was sought nor the report is a part of the relied upon documents.