Special Court Empowered To Try General IPC Offences Arising Out Of Case Probed By NIA: Karnataka HC
🔹 Background of the Ruling
The Karnataka High Court was dealing with a case where:
The National Investigation Agency (NIA) was investigating a matter under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA).
Alongside UAPA offences, Indian Penal Code (IPC) offences (like murder, conspiracy, rioting, etc.) were also involved.
A question arose whether the Special NIA Court, constituted under the NIA Act, 2008, could try the IPC offences as well — or only the UAPA/NIA-specific offences.
🔹 Key Legal Issue
Can a Special Court constituted under the NIA Act try general IPC offences, if they arise out of the same transaction as the offences under the UAPA/NIA Act?
🔹 Karnataka High Court’s Decision: Yes
The Karnataka High Court held that:
A Special Court under the NIA Act has jurisdiction to try both:
Scheduled offences (i.e., offences under UAPA and other laws listed in the Schedule of the NIA Act), and
General IPC offences if they arise out of the same set of facts or transaction.
🔹 Legal Reasoning
1. Section 22 of the NIA Act, 2008
It empowers the State Government to designate Sessions Courts as Special Courts for the trial of scheduled offences.
These Special Courts have the same powers as a Court of Sessions.
2. Section 14 of the NIA Act
It states that while trying any offence under its jurisdiction, the Special Court shall also try any other offence with which the accused may be charged at the same trial.
➤ This is critical: it enables the Special Court to try both scheduled offences and non-scheduled offences (like IPC offences) if part of the same transaction.
🔹 Judicial Interpretation
⚖️ Karnataka High Court's Observations:
Doctrine of “same transaction” applies — If IPC and UAPA offences are part of the same criminal act or conspiracy, then a joint trial is proper.
The objective is to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and to ensure effective administration of justice.
The Special Court is not limited to only NIA Act offences, but has plenary jurisdiction over all connected offences.
🔹 Relevant Case Laws
1. Mohd. Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra, (2012) 9 SCC 1
The Supreme Court upheld the trial of multiple offences under IPC and other statutes together, as they were part of the same terrorist incident.
Reiterated that a joint trial is valid where the offences are interconnected.
2. State of Rajasthan v. Gopal Dass, AIR 1969 SC 713
Clarified that when multiple offences are committed in the course of the same transaction, they can be tried together.
The emphasis is on judicial economy and fairness.
3. State of Maharashtra v. Abdul Hamid Haji Mohammed, AIR 1968 SC 110
The Court held that a Special Court constituted under a specific Act (like NDPS or UAPA) can try offences under IPC if they are integral to the main offence.
🔹 Implications of the Ruling
Prevents multiplicity of trials:
Victims, witnesses, and prosecution are not burdened by multiple trials for the same act.
Ensures speedy and effective justice:
One court dealing with all charges leads to quicker outcomes.
Strengthens the powers of Special Courts:
They are not restricted in scope and can handle complex, multi-faceted cases involving multiple laws.
🔹 Conclusion
The Karnataka High Court has rightly affirmed that Special Courts under the NIA Act are empowered to try IPC offences if they are part of the same transaction or conspiracy as the scheduled offences.
This decision aligns with the principle of comprehensive adjudication and ensures that justice is served efficiently without unnecessary procedural hurdles.
RELATED Blog
0 comments