9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (2) TMI 868X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tic Control Bureau, Eastern Zone Unit, Calcutta. It is the contention of the petitioner that since the above noted case is not instituted on the basis of a police report and the same is a warrant case instituted otherwise that on police report, the procedure laid down under Sections 244 to 247 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be followed in the instant case. It is the grievance of the petitioner that since the learned Additional Sessions Judge who has been empowered to try the instant case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), in absence of the Special Court, had not followed the procedure enumerated under Sections 244 to 247 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a case o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on framing of charge may be considered by the learned trial Court. It has been urged by Mr. Ghosh that prayer made by the petitioner for adopting the said procedure in the instant case not having been allowed by the learned trial Court, the impugned order whereby the petition filed by the petitioner has been rejected suffers from patent illegality warranting interference of this Court in revision. Mr. Ghosh has sought to argue that the prosecution has to produce all their witnesses and their documents and thereafter charge may be framed if the learned trial Court finds prima facie materials to frame charge. In other words, the contention raised by Mr. Ghosh in support of the petitioner is that the instant case is substantially a warrant cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ays down that a Special Court may, upon a perusal of police report of the facts constituting an offence under the Act or upon a complaint made by an Officer of the Central Government or a State Government authorized in this behalf, take cognizance of the offence without the accused being committed to it for trial. He has further urged that since the procedure for trial of sessions case is required to be followed in cases of like nature covered by the Act, there can hardly be any scope for applicability of the provisions relating to trial of warrant cases by Magistrates as embodied under Chapter XIX of the Code of Criminal Procedure in such case where charge can be framed, if upon consideration of the record of the case and the documents sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all be deemed to be a Court of Session. The Court of Session during the absence of a Special Court is empowered to try cases during the transitional period and it should be deemed to be a Special Court having power under Section 366A(1)(d) of the Act to take cognizance of the offence and there is no need for commitment for Court of Session to take cognizance of the offence committed under the Act. The non obstante clause contained in the beginning of Section 36Aof the Act necessarily indicates that the procedure contemplated in the Code for trial of the offences under the Act is not at all applicable and the procedure contemplated by the said section for trial of the cases under the Act alone is applicable. In this context reference can be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
