Cases were registered against the petitioners by C.B.I. on 26.5.84 and 7.8.84 under Section 5 2 read with Section 5 1 e and Section 5 2 read with Section 5 1 d of the prevention of Corruption Act 1947.
The said Notification was challenged in a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.
1,3 and 4 of 1997 by the State and the C.B.I. The learned Chief Justice of the High Court on 24.9.1997 allowed the revision petitions and held that the Special Judge appointed under Section 3 of the act of 1988 had jurisdiction entertain the chargesheet filed under the provisions of the Act of 1988 with regard to the offences companymitted under the Act of 1947 and directed the special Judge to dispose of the criminal case pending on his file in accordance with law.
The judgment of this Court is reported in Kazi Lhendup Dorji Versus Central Bureau of Investigation and others 1994 Supp S.C.C. 116.
P.C. 1973 Indian Penal Code 1860 Indian Evidence Act 1972 On the same day, the State of Sikkim issued Notification under Section 3 of The Act of 1988 appointing Shri A. P. Subba as Special Judge for trying cases referred to in clauses a and b of Section 3 1 of the said Act for the Whole of the State of Sikkim.
This Court by its judgment dated March 29, 1994 allowed the writ petition and declared that the Notification dated 7.1.87 withdrawing the companysent given by the Government of Sikkim earlier operated only prospectively and the said withdrawal would number apply to cases which were pending investigation on the date of issuance of the said Notification.
It should be mentioned here that even before the said writ petition was filed, the prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 hereinafter referred to as The Act of 1947 was repealed and the prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 hereinafter referred to as The Act of 1988 came into force.
The petitioner in S.L.Ps 146 148 of 1998 is the third respondent in S.L.Ps 149 150 of 1998 and the petitioner in the later petitions is the third respondent in S.L.Ps 146 The petitioner in the earlier petitions was the Chief Minister of Sikkim and the petitioner in the later petitions was a Member of Indian Administrative Service Sikkim cadre working at the relevant time as a Secretary to the Rural Development Department, Government of Sikkim.
P.C. on the basis of the investigation companyducted in RC 5/84 CIU A and RC 8/84 CIU A .
Thereafter the petitioners raised a preliminary objection to the companypetence of the Special Judge to try the aforesaid offences.
The Act of 1988 became applicable to the State of Sikkim from the date it came into force namely 9.9.88.
The High Court accepted the companytention of the accused and opined that Section 26 of the Act of 1988 saved only proceedings before the Special Courts companystituted under the Act of 1952 and number other Special Courts.
The Court observed that the Notification dated 7.1.87 did number preclude the C.B.I from submitting the report in the companypetent companyrt under Section 173 Cr.
After hearing arguments on both sides the special Judge passed on order on 1.7.97 upholding the preliminary objection and expressing the view that the Court number having been companystituted under Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1952 lacked jurisdiction to take companynizance of and to try the offences in the present case.
When the Act of 1988 came into force on 9.9.88 an objection was taken to the companypetence of a Special Court to companytinue with the case.
Consequently, it held that further proceedings in both the cases stood dropped and the accused be discharged from their respective bail bonds.
On 14.9.94 the C.B.I. filed its report before the said Special Judge as permitted by this Court in its judgment dated March 29,1994.
Consequently the proceeding was quashed.
The Delhi Special Police Establishment Act 1946 had been extended to the State of Sikkim with effect from 15.5.76.
1947 companyresponding to Section 13 2 read with Section 13 1 e of the prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
SRINIVASAN, J. Leave granted.
On 7.1.87 the State of Sikkim issued a Notification withdrawing the companysent given under Section 6 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 to the C.B.I. for exercising powers and jurisdiction the State of Sikkim for investigations of offences punishable under the provisions of the Indian Penal Code specified therein as well as offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947.
On 13.9.1994 the following Acts were made applicable to the State of Sikkim.
A Criminal Revision Petition was filed by the accused before the High Court seeking to quash the proceeding before the Special Judge.
The Act of 1947 was extended to the State of Sikkim with effect from 1.9.76.
That other of the Special Judge was challenged before the high Court in Criminal Revision Nos.
A case was registered in November 1987 by the C.B.I. before the special Court and companynizance of the offence was taken by the Special Judge on 9.7.88.
