STATE OF ASSAM Vs. PRASENJIT NARZARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The orders dated 31-8-1990, 59-1990 and 10-9-1990 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Gauhati passed in Misc. Case No. 199(K)/1990 Shri present it Basumatari versus the State of Assam arising out of Chandmari P.S. Case No. 194 of 1990 under Section 412 IPC read with sections 4/5 of the Terrorist And Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 have been impugned by this Revision by the State of Assam.

(2.) The Sessions Judge, Kamrup, Gauhati was the designated Court under the provision of Section 9 of the TADA (P) Act, 1987, hereinafter called the Act for all purposes, at the relevant time. The case was in the file of designated court. The designated Court was out of station on the 3 relevant dates on which the Additional Sessions Judge passed the orders.

(3.) Admittedly, the Additional-Sessions Judge was not a designated court under Section 9 of the Act when the impugned orders were passed. An amount of Rs. 2 lakhs cash was seized from the accused person of the case. The AddI. Sessions Judge vide impugned orders particularly dated 10- 9-1990 reelected the seized money to the accused on executing a bond before the Investigating Officer of the case. Perused all the 3 impugned orders particularly dated 10-9-1990.