HUSSNA Vs. N.I.A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Murli Manohar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as Ms. Shikha Sinha, learned counsel for the National Investigating Agency.

(2.) These proceedings have come up before this Division Bench in view of an order dtd. 16/11/2017, passed by learned Single Judge in proceedings Under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. bearing No.7514 of 2017; Hussna Vs. N.I.A. through Home Secretary-I and another, which was registered at the behest of the appellant. The said order reads as under:-

(3.) The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant before us challenged an order dtd. 6/10/2017, passed by Special Judge, N.I.A. Lucknow allowing the application of National Investigating Agency for taking voice sample of the accused/appellant during pendency of Session Trial No.157 of 2015; State Vs. Hussna and others, related to Police Station Kotwali City District Bijnore as asserted by the appellant. Another order dtd. 24/4/2015, by which the Union of India had directed the N.I.A. to take up the investigation of the said case and such other offences as may come to light during investigation, was also put to challenge. The learned Single Judge as is evident from the order quoted hereinabove noticed the provision of Sec. 21 of National Investigating Agency Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2008) and opined that the proceedings under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. would not be maintainable challenging the order passed by the Special Judge, N.I.A. Lucknow as prima-facie such matter should be decided under the provisions of the Special Act i.e. N.I.A. Act, 2008 and a special forum has been provided under sub Sec. (2) of Sec. 21 of the Act of 2008 for the said purpose to judge the maintainability of any petition to be out of the mischief of Sec. 21 it is required to be decided by the Special Forum provided by Sec. 21 of the Act of 2008. Thereafter a direction was issued to put up the matter before the appropriate Court in the next week.