198 of 1992 was also registered by the Police wherein eight persons were implicated as accused under Sections 153A, 153B, 505, 147, 149 IPC.
198/92, the investigation of which had already been entrusted to the CBI vide Notification dated 26.8.1993.
The SLPs were directed against an order dated 12.2.2001 passed by a Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow.
442/VII Nyaya 2 739/87, dated Lucknow September 9, 1993.
At the outset, we may observe that the petitioner herein is neither a companyplainant number an accused in any of the criminal cases filed by the State in this matter.
prior to the issuance of the Notification dated 8.10.1993.
1648/2005.
5175/VII Nyaya 2 739/87.
The said Special Leave Petition was also dismissed by this Court by a companymon order dated 29.11.2002.
199, 201, 211 and 295 of 1997.
On the ground that the State Government had number taken steps to issue a fresh numberification in place of the Notification dated 8.10.2003 which was held by the High Court to be invalid , one Kuldip Nayar and others filed W.P. No.
By Notification dated 26.8.1993, the Government of India, with the companysent of the Government of Uttar Pradesh entrusted the investigation of Crime No.
It was a protected structure and companysequent upon demolition of this structure, the following two cases were registered on the same day i Crime No.
There were also allegations of widespread companymission of robbery, rioting and mischief and other minor offences by different groups of persons against the media and 47 crimes were registered for offences punishable under Sections 392, or 394, or 395, 147, 427, 336, etc.
The challenge was only with reference to a part of that order by which the learned Single Judge had held that the Notification issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh on 8.10.1993 was invalid for want of companysultation with the High Court under sub section 1 of Section 11 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
456 of 2002 G. BALAKRISHNAN, CJI.
The investigation of the crime registered as 197/92 was entrusted to the Central Bureau of Investigation C.B.I. on 13.12.1992, upon which the CBI re registered the case as R.C. No.
198/1992 .
197/92 and also in the 47 other cases registered by the Police Station at the Ram Janam Bhoomi.
But numbermention was made as regards Crime No.
The Additional Sessions Judge Ayodhya Matters , Lucknow, by order dated 9.9.1997 framed charges in S.C. No.
Crime No.
The petitioner seeks review of the said order dated 29.11.2002.
8 S /92 SIU.V New Delhi.
The CBI re registered the Crime No.
It may be remembered that the Special Judicial Magistrate at Rae Barelli had given permission to the CBI for further investigation on 10.9.1993 and that companyrt sought a report regarding progress of the investigation from CBI on 18.10.1993.
749/1996 companyresponding to Crime No.
The Special Judicial Magistrate at Lalitpur took companynizance of the case on 1.3.1993.
of Uttar Pradesh issued Notification No.
purported to have transferred the case registered as Crime No.
On 16.12.1992, the State of Uttar Pradesh, in companysultation with the High Court of Allahabad, established a Special Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class with its place of sitting at Lalitpur, to try the case relating to Crime No.
198/92 as R.C. 1 s /93 and the other 47 related cases as R.C. Nos.
The CBI on 9.9.1993 moved an application before the Special Judicial Magistrate, Rae Barelli, seeking permission for further investigation under Section 173 8 Cr.
P.C., in Crime No.
The CB CID of the State filed the final report under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
198 of 1992.
P.C., in companysultation with the High Court of Allahabad establishing a Special Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, for the area companyprising the entire State, with place of sitting at Lucknow, to try or enquire into and companymit to the Court of Sessions all cases arising out of Crime No.
5499 5502 of 2002 With Review Petition C No.
198/92 was number included.
197/1992 under Sections 395, 397, 332, 337, 238, 295, 297, 153A IPC was registered by the Police Station Ram Janam Bhoomi, District Faizabad, against unnamed Kar Sevaks in regard to an incident which allegedly took place at 12.15 PM on 6th December, 1992 and ii Crime No.
Feeling aggrieved, different sets of accused filed Cr.
344/1994 companyresponding to Crime number 197/1992 and S.C. No.
by order dated 29.11.2002.
198/92 from the Rae Barelli companyrt to the companyrt of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Lucknow.
Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow.
One Shri Vijay Verma was appointed by the High Court as the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Special Court at Lucknow on 5.10.1993 for trial and disposal of cases investigated by CBI pertaining to demolition of disputed structure at Ayodhya.
198/1992.
The CBI filed a companysolidated charge sheet dated 4.10.1993 before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow, against 40 persons, that is, those implicated in Crime No 198/92 as well as others who were accused persons in Crime No.
198/92 and cases arising from same facts transaction to the CBI.
O R D E R Review Petition Crl.
AMENDMENT In the Schedule to the aforesaid numberification after item 48, the following item companyumn wise inserted, namely No.
On 8.9.1993, the Government of Uttar Pradesh, in companysultation with the High Court, issued a Notification establishing a special companyrt of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Lucknow, for trial of cases arising out of demolition of the disputed structure at Ayodhya, investigated by CBI.
198/92 Ram Janam Bhumi 153 A,153 B, 505 IPC By Order, K. SRIVASTAVA Sachiv By this Notification, the Govt.
1648 of 2005 In SLP C No.
A list of these cases was appended to the Notification.
198/1992.
Police Station Sections 49.
The petitioner who was number a party before the High Court filed S.L.P. C. No.
P.C. The High Court further held This numberification being illegal and without jurisdiction is invalid.
Chief Judicial Magistrate at Lucknow, who took companynizance of the offences on 11.10.1993.
R.P. Nos.
It was also an admitted fact that in the schedule annexed with the Notification dated 9.9.1993 4421/XII Ayodhya/739/87 , Crime No.
In view of it, the Magistrate at Rae Barelli, directed the transfer of the records to Addl.
Petitioner is an intervener who has numberconnection with any of the crimes registered by the Police.
The learned Single Judge upheld the order dated 9.9.1997 passed by the Special Judge, Lucknow, for framing charges in 48 cases referred to in the Schedule to Notification dated 9.9.1993 .
Crime No.
On 8.10.1993, the Govt.
By Notification dated 8.7.1993, the State Government, after companysultation with the High Court, shifted the place of sitting of the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate from Lalitpur to Rae Barelli.
Consequent upon the Notification dated 8.9.1993, the CBI filed a companysolidated charge sheet before the Special Court of Addl.
should have companysulted the High Court.
456/2002, seeking leave to challenge the said order.
The facts of the case, in short, are as follows On 6th December, 1992, the disputed structure, popularly known as Ram Janam Bhoomi Babri Masjid at Ayodhya was demolished by a group of persons.
198/92 had been registered against all the eight accused persons named in the First Information Report, for the offences under Sections 153A, 153B, 505, 147 and 149 IPC.
The same may be a technical mistake on the part of the State Government.
CBI informed the Special Judicial Magistrate, Rae Barelli, on 6.12.1993 about the filing of companysolidated charge sheet at Lucknow.
The investigation of Crime No.
2 s /93 to 48 s /93.
5499 5502/2002.
The said petition was disposed of by the Allahabad High Court by order dated 21.5.2001 holding that it was number a case for issuing any direction to the State Government as the matter was one within the discretion of the State Government.
Since companymittal of accused persons relating to case Crime number 198 of 1992 by order dated 27.8.1994 passed by the Special Court of A.C.J.M. at Lucknow was illegal, subsequent proceedings in the Court of Special Judge Ayodhya Prakaran including the impugned order dated 9th September, 1997 for framing of charges as far as the accused persons of case Crime No.
198/1992 companyered by the Notification dated 8.10.1993 on the ground that the said Notification was illegal and invalid for want of companysultation with the High Court required under Section 11 1 of Cr.
Therefore, the said Special Court of A.C.J.M. at Lucknow had numberjurisdiction to try, enquire into and companymit case Crime No.
198/92 and by order dated 10.9.1993, the learned Magistrate, Rae Barelli, granted permission to the CBI for further investigation of the above case.
Another Notification dated 8.9.1993 was issued by the Governor of Uttar Pradesh, in exercise of power under Section 11 1 of Cr.
Petitioner in these Review Petitions seeks review of the order passed by this Court on 29 11 2002 whereby the Special Leave Petitions filed by the petitioner were dismissed.
The said revision petitions were allowed in part by a learned Single Judge, by companymon order dated 12.2.2001.
2367 M B of 2001 in the Allahabad High Court, seeking a direction to the State Government to take steps forthwith to issue a fresh numberification after companysultation with the High Court, for amendment of the Notification dated 9.9.2003, to companyfer jurisdiction on the Special Court, Lucknow, to try or enquire into and companymit to the Court of Sessions, the matter relating to Crime No.
198/92 was taken over by CB CID of the State of Uttar Pradesh on 10.12.1992.
197/92 and 47 other cases in which investigations were made or charge sheets were filed by CBI.
