DOMIN JINI Vs. STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Ms. T. Jini, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. Duge Soki, learned Addl. Senior Government Advocate, for State Respondents No. 1 to 4.

(2.) Following a consensus reached between the parties at Aalo Police Station, West Siang District, to settle an incident that took place between the petitioners and the private respondents on 18.09.2015 in a Kebang (Local Authority). But private respondents filed an application before the respondent No. 2 viz. Deputy Commissioner, Pangin, Siang District for holding the Kebang at Pangin. The Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, Pangin, without territorial jurisdiction, entertained the case and issued the impugned order, dated 21.09.2015, to the respondent No. 3 viz. Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo, informing that a Kebang was fixed at Pangin, Siang District, on 24.09.2015 and accordingly, summoned the petitioners, as accused, to attend the Kebang. The petitioners filed an application on 23.09.2015 before the respondent No. 2, challenging his territorial jurisdiction over the place of trial and enquiry that falls within the territory of West Siang District and therefore, they declined to attend the meeting of Kebang on 24.09.2015. The Kebang sat on 24.09.2015 and after deliberation fixed 30.10.2015 for next sitting and accordingly, issued notice to the petitioners. The petitioners again did not attend the Kebang and consequently, the Kebang, without recording any evidence and also without giving opportunity of being heard to them, declared them as accused and penalized them with an amount of Rs. 4,80,000.00. Against it, the petitioners preferred an appeal before the respondent No. 3 viz. Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo, for fixing date for fresh Kebang, but the same was dismissed. Several representations were made before the respondents No. 2 & 3, but there was no response. Hence, it is prayed to set aside and quash the Kebang decision dated 30.09.2015 and the Express Letter dated 21.09.2015, issued by the respondent No. 3 viz. Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, Pangin.

(3.) Ms. Jini, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that the incident involved in this proceeding, took place at Maglu Village near Jini Village, West Siang District and the petitioners are residents of the aforesaid District. Therefore, pursuant to the decisions rendered by this Court in the cases of Registrar General, Gauhati High Court -vs- Union of India, 2013 4 GauLT 1109, and Likha Serbi -vs- State of Arunachal Pradesh, 2016 1 GauLT 580 and the separation of Judiciary, the judicial powers both Civil and Criminal vested on the executive, by the North East Frontier (Administration of Justice) Regulation, 1945, has ceased to operate and further, following the creation of 4 (four) new districts out of Siang District namely, West Siang, East Siang, Upper Siang and Siang Districts, the place of occurrence falls within the West Siang District. According to Ms. Jini, learned counsel, as the accusedpetitioners are residents of West Siang District, neither the village authority of Pangin of Siang District nor the Deputy Commissioner, Siang District, Aalo, has jurisdiction to try the case.