JAHIDUL ISLAM Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D. Nath, learned Senior Government Advocate appearing for the State respondent and Mr. R. K. D. Choudhury, learned Dy.SGI, appearing on behalf of the Union of India.

(2.) These two criminal petitions are taken up together for final hearing as the learned counsels for the parties urged that the cause of action and the challenge made in these two petitions arise out of same cause of action i.e. challenge to the proceedings under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short UA(P)Act, 1967) for want of sanction under Sec. 45 of the UA(P)Act. 1967 registered as Sessions Case No. 125/2023 arising out of Barpeta P.S. Case No. 175/2023 under Ss. 120(B)/121/121-A of the IPC read with Sec. 10/13/18 of UA(P) Act,1967 pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Barpeta. The further challenge is order dtd. 13/9/2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge Barpeta, whereby Charges under Sec. 10/13/18 of UA(P) Act, 1967, were framed against the petitioners.

(3.) Contentions of the petitioners: Mr. Borthakur, learned counsel for the petitioners assailing the aforesaid order and the entire proceedings, argues the following: