Court asks the Chief Public Prosecutor Aruna Pai to produce the records showing the permissions which may have been granted to the Sessions judge under question in the petition.
Chaudhry: There is no doubt that Vadane was eligible to be appointed as special judges.
But there is a world of difference of being eligible to be a judge and actually being a judge.
Chaudhry submits that section 13 also mentions that notwithstanding anything in the Code, every Scheduled offence shall be tried ONLY by the Special Court.
Chaudhry: The district judge is appointed by the High Court and the special judge is appointed by the Central govt
Section 13 gives power of original jurisdiction to the court.
Chaudhry: Judge Vadane was an additional judge. He could not have taken cognisance of the chargesheet unless specific instructions from the Principal District Judge.
Chaudhry refers to Section 194 of the CrPC: As Addl Sessions Judge or Assistant Sessions Judge shall try such cases as the Sessions Judge of the division may, by general or special order, make over to him for trial or as the High Court may, by special order, direct him to try.
Chaudhry: This order by Judge Vadane, he took cognizance and then issued process. He could not have given powers to himself. It is not even the PDJ. It has to be through the CJ of HC with State govt.
Chaudhry: Even though NIA took over the investigation in 2020, the State police could investigate the scheduled offences as per the Act.
The investigation done is irrelevant.
The Scheduled offence has to be tried by the Special Court only!
Chaudhry: I went through the notification and the question is how could the judge have heard the case before that.
Their IO must respond, how can he go to any judge. Can he go to whichever judge he wants!
Chaudhry: The first is it created scheduled offences, which was not done before.
The NIA act changed that all UAPA offences went under scheduled offences triable by special court.
Chaudhry: The other thing is creating special courts to try scheduled offences in original jurisdiction. It mentions appointment of special judges through a different mechanism.
Chaudhry: According to the NIA affidavit NIA Act does not come in the picture till NIA takes over investigation.
I do not agree. What happens to orders passed without jurisdiction?
Chaudhry: So NIA did not touch the case till the extension, till they took the investigation, so then who has the power? Then it goes as per the CrPC.
Court: In a Supreme Court judgement it was held that the special court is a sessions court. Please elaborate on that.
Chaudhry: But that is true because the Act states so.
Look at other acts, do those acts have original jurisdiction, do the judges have a special appointment procedure, the SC/ST Act and the TADA and POTA courts have no original jurisdiction.
ASG: My submission is that the judgment of Bikramjit Singh and Vidyadharan v. State of Kerala are both being considered.
Both judgments discussed of whether CJM is a special court.
ASG: Offences under NIA constitute offences under UAPA. They concern the national security and are considered to be serious offences. The purpose for this act is to punish the offender.
ASG: It is not that the sessions judge is not competent to decide the UAPA Act. Till a proper notification is issued and the judge is not designated as NIA Court, all matters assigned to a sessions judge is vitiated ..this submission according to me is wrong.
Court: Chaudhry’s submission is special judge had been appointed, he showed notifications. His submission is that the judge who passed the order was not designated special judge.
Court: He relied upon Section 2 of the UAPA Act amended after the NIA Act.
But if you read the definition, it says and includes a Special Court constituted under section 11 or under Section 22 of the NIA Act.
Court: It does not give exclusive jurisdiction. It says criminal court having jurisdiction… So as per Chaudhry’s submission, if the special judge has no jurisdiction then it goes before the Magistrate. Get clarity on this.
[Covid 19] Allahabad High Court to hear the suo moto COVID 19 matter shortly.
Earlier, the court had directed the government to inform the court about the steps being taken to upgrade the primary and secondary health care centers.
Manish Goyal, AAG: We were directed to file the status report about future planning and steps to tackle the pandemic. We have filed an affidavit in this regard.
Delhi High Court to hear plea seeking direction to Twitter India to appoint Resident Grievance Officer under IT Rules, 2021. On last date of hearing, Court had asked the social media platform when it would appoint such an officer
#BombayHighCourt is hearing two petitions assailing the Information Technology (Guidelines for intermediaries and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021.
Hearing before Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni.
Sr Adv Darius Khambatta for one of the petitioners, which is a digital news portal, states there are amendments which are required to be carried out in that petition.
Supreme Court to shortly hear a plea challenging the provisions dealing with restitution of conjugal rights since "court-mandated restitution of conjugal rights amounts to a "coercive act" on part of the state." #supremecourt#conjugalrights
The plea states that such a direction for restitution of conjugal rights is an infringement of one's sexual & decisional autonomy, right to privacy & dignity, and thus a violation of the right to life under Article 21 #supremecourt
Plea seeks Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and Section 22 of the Special Marriage Act to be struck down. Additionally, the enforcement of restitution of conjugal rights as provided for under Order XXI Rule 32 and 33 of the CPC is also sought to be struck down
Ghaziabad Video: Karnataka HC to shortly begin hearing a plea filed by Manish Maheshwari, an employee of Twitter Communications India Private Ltd challenging notice issued under Section 41A of CrPC.
#SupremeCourt to hear an appeal by Amazon challenging the March 22 order passed by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court staying the Single Judge order which had directed the attachment of Future Group companies and Kishore Biyani's properties @amazon@FutureGroup
Senior Advocate Harish Salve: the tribunal is starting hearing from Monday. The application challenging jurisdiction and to vacate emergency arbitrator hearing starts in 2 days
SC: Here the question is if the appeal is maintainable