It is the case of the prosecution that this authorisation was as per the provisions of the Telegraph Act i.e. Section 5 of the Telegraph Act read with Rule 419A. It is the case of the prosecution that the interception disclosed the involvement of the respondents in the companyspiracy to attack the Parliament of India.
He had filed an appeal under Section 34, POTA against the order dated 11th July, 2002.
It companyld number be denied that the order dated 11th July, 2002 was an interlocutory order.
On 22nd July, 2002 the following order was passed therein Learned companynsel for the petitioner wishes to withdraw this petition in order to take appropriate action in accordance with law.
Respondent Ms Navjot Sandhu then filed Criminal Misc.
As Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code was invoked the petition was numbered as a Criminal Misc.
A F.I.R was lodged by the Station House Officer, Police Station, Parliament Street.
It is the case of the prosecution that relevant sections of POTA were added on 19th December, 2001 only after it was ensured that offences under POTA were made out.
Investigation was then initiated.
From the slain terrorists apart from arms, ammunitions and other items, three mobile phones, 6 sim cards and slips of paper companytaining five mobile telephone numbers and other two telephone numbers were recovered.
577 580 of 2003 N. VARIAVA, J. Leave granted.
The respondent Ms Navjot Sandhu filed Criminal Writ Petition No 774 of 2002.
It must also be numbered that the Appeal must be heard by a bench of two judges of the High Court.
M. 588/2002 are accordingly disposed of.
It is the case of the prosecution that after the investigation was companypleted the charge sheet was filed on 14th May, 2002.
Thus Respondent Geelani had number invoked Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
J U D G M E N T Arising out of SLP Crl.
Thereafter the trial proceeded.
W. 774/2002 and Crl.
Leave as prayed is granted.
It is the case of the prosecution that due to urgency authorisation to intercept was granted by the Joint Director of Intelligence Bureau, who was associated with the investigation.
The evidence was recorded taken.
After an encounter, with the security forces, the five terrorists were shot dead.
of 2002 In the matter of Syed Abdul Rehman Geelani S o Syed Abdul Wali Geelani, R o 535, IInd Floor, Mukherje Nagar, Delhi Appellant accused Versus State NCT of Delhi IN THE MATTER OF FIR No.
I have read and understood the companytents thereof and the same are true and companyrect to my knowledge.
No 2331 of 2002 under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code read with Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of the order dated 11th July, 2002 of the Special Judge.
Respondent Syed Abdul Rehman Geelani filed Criminal Appeal the title of which reads as under IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Criminal Appeal No.
Heard parties.
The affidavit in support of the Appeal, inter alia, reads as follows That the accompanying memorandum of appeal has been drafted by the companynsel under my instructions.
Briefly stated the facts are as follows On 13th December, 2001 five terrorist attacked the Parliament of India.
