By keeping the AK 56 rifles, hand grenades, pistol and cartridges in his possession willingly, accused Sanjay Dutt facilitated these objectives.
Accused Yusuf Mohsin Nullwaal, Kesri Bapuji Adenia, Rusi Framrose Mulla, Ajay Yashprakash Marwah, caused wilful destruction of evidence namely 1 AK 56 rifle, one 9 mm.
SCR 263 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by S. VERMA, J. By an order dated 18.8.1994 made in these special leave petitions by the Division Bench B.P. Jeevan Reddy and N.P. Singh, JJ. ,
The questions of law indicated in the said order of reference, to be decided by us, are three, namely The proper companystruction of Section 5 of the TADA Act indicating the ingredients of the offence punishable thereunder and the ambit of the defence available to a person accused of that offence The proper companystruction of clause bb of sub section 4 of Section 20 of the TADA Act indicating the nature of right of an accused to be released on bail thereunder, on the default to companyplete investigation within the time allowed therein and The proper companystruction and ambit of sub section 8 of Section 20 of the TADA Act indicating the scope for bail thereunder.
We shall number deal with these questions.
The charge against the petitioner is of several offence including those under the TADA Act, of which Section 5 thereof is one, Reliance is placed by the prosecution on the testimony of certain witnesses, some incriminat ing circumstances and an unretracted companyfession by the petitioner himself.
pistol and 53 rounds of live cartridges were recovered during the companyrse of investigation.
Since both House of Parliament were number in session and it was necessary to take immediate action, the President promulgated the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Ordinance, 1987 2 of 1987 on the 23rd May, 1987, which came into force with effect from the 24th May, 1987.
Pistol and cartridges for the purpose of companymitting terrorist acts.
It is useful to refer to the material portion of the Statement of objects and Reasons which is, as under The Terrorist and Disruptive activities Prevention Act, 1985, was enacted in May, 1985, in the background of escalation of terrorist activities in many parts of the companyntry at that time.
The Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act, 1987 is an Act to make special provisions for the prevention of, and of companying with, terrorist and disruptive activities and for matters companynected therewith or incidental thereto.
It was expected then that it would be possible to companytrol the menace within a period of two years and, therefore, the life of the said Act was restricted to a period of two years from the date of its companymencement, However, it was subsequently realised that on account of various factors, what were stray incidents in the begnning have number become a companytinuing menace specially in States like Punjab.
1994 3 Suppl.
On the basis of experience, it was felt that in order to companybat and companye with terrorist and disruptive activities effectively, it is number only necessary to companytinue the said law but also to strength it further.
These special leave petitions are against the order of the Designated Court, in substance, for grant of bail to the petitioner.
The Statement of Objects and Reason indicates the historical background and the situation which led to enactment.
pistol, and cartridges by deliberately removing them from the house of accused Sanjay Dutt, at his instance, with the intention to protect the offender i.e. Sanjay Dutt from legal companysequences and therefore, they are also guilty of the offence u s 201 IPC.
these matters relating to grant of bail to the petitioner, an accused in the Bombay blasts case being tried by the Designated Court for Greater Bombay, have been referred for decision by a Constitution Bench since certain questions involved in these special leave petitions arise in respect of a large number of persons accused of offences punishable under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act.
The Designated Court has refused bail to the petitioner.
Some parts of the rifle, the 9 mm.
The only material facts for answering the above question are these The petitioner is one of the several accused persons in case No.
The aforesaid Act 1985 was due to expire on the 23rd May, 1987.
1 of 1993 being trial in the Designated Court for Greater Bombay in companynection with the bomb blasts which took place in Bombay on 12.3.1993 killing a large number of person and causing huge destruction of property.
The case of the prosecution against the petitioner, set out in the charge sheet, is that on 16.1.1993 he knowingly and intentionally procured from accused Anees Ibrahim Kaskar through Sameer Ahmad Hingora, Hanif Kadawala, Baba Ibrahim Musa Chouhan, Abu Salem Abdul, Qayoob Ansari and Man zoor Ahmed Sayed Ahmed 3 AK 56 rifles, 25 hand grenades and one 9 mm.
