Saeed Sheikh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
 INSC 1476 (21
Mukherjee, S.P. Kurdukar
O R D
instant appeal has been filed by the appellant for quashing the charges that
have framed against him by the Designated Judge, Meerut under Sections Act and
Sections 3 and 4 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act,
198/ ("TADA' for short)" Mr. Ramaswamy, the learned counsel for the
appellant, submitted that the entire proceedings initiated against the
appellant, including the charges, initiated against the appellant, including
the charges, were liable to be quashed as the First Information Report, which
ultimately culminated in the impugned proceedings against the appellant, was
lodged in utter breach of Section 20 A (1) of TADA, which provides that no
information about the commission of an of fence under TADA shall be recorded by
the police without the prior approval of the District Superintendent of Police.
To bring home his contention he has drawn on attention to the F.I.R. that was
recorded on the complaint of a Sub Inspector of Police for offences punishable
under Sections 332, 307 and 427 IPC, 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act and
Sections 3 and 4 of TADA.
having given our anxious consideration to the above contention of Mr. Ramaswamy
we are unable to accept the same. it is of course true that when the above
F.I.R. was recorded not only for of fences under TADA but also for offences
under the Indian Penal Code for commission of which the concerned police
officer was competent to lodge an F.I.R. without such approval. The absence of
approval of District Superintendent of Police as required under Section 20 A
(1) of TADA at that stage only disentitled the investigating agency to investigate
into the offences relating to TADA but it had a statutory right to investigate
into the other offences alleged in the F.I.R. If the F.I.R. was lodged only
for commission of offences under TADA we might have persuaded ourselves to
accept the contention of Mr. Ramaswamy, but there being allegation of other
offences therein it cannot be said that the F.I.R. so far as it sought
investigation of these offences was non-est.
are certain other facts which required to be noticed at this stage. After the
F.I.R was lodged, the investigating agency made a prayer before the
Superintendent of Police, Ghaziabad on November 21, 1994 seeking his approval to and
Sections 3 and 4 of TADA on the ground that during investigation the
involvement of the appellant in commission of such offences was revealed. The
approval sought for was granted and thereafter on completion of investigation chargesheet
was submitted with the sanction of the concerned authority as required under
Section of the concerned authority as required under Section 20 A (2) of TADA.
Since the above steps taken by the Investigating Agency are in conformity with
the provisions of both sub- sections (1) & (2) of Section 20 a of TADA the
impugned charges are not liable to be quashed on the grounds agitated by Mr. Ramaswamy.
As on other point was raised in support of this appeal we dismiss the same.