HC quashes a part of govt order transferring cases

The Madras High Court today quashed a part of a government order through which it transferred certain cases filed against six accused involved in various offences under IPC, Explosive Substances Act and/or Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act to a special court here.
Justice V Ramasubramanian, who upheld the power of the government to constitute special courts under NIA Act, quashed the second part of the government order passed by the Home Department on August five last year transferring the cases filed under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) to the special court for trial.
The matter relates to eight cases registered against A Bheema Dowlath, Sameem Bhanu, Mohemmed Thasin, S Tharveen Maideen, Abdullah and Musthafa who were facing trial in various magistrate courts in Tamil Nadu.

All these cases were transferred by the government by forming a special court at Poonamallee here.
The petitioners submitted that the provisions of the NIA Act, 2008 are not applicable to their cases since these cases were not investigated by NIA.
They submitted that with the other contentions such as the definition of the word "court" in Section 2(1)(d) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 does not include a special court constituted under Section 22 of NIA Act, 2008.

The ordinary offences triable by session courts cannot be taken to be acts of terrorism so as to warrant a trial by special courts and that by forcing the accused to engage a new counsel at the new place of trial, the valuable right of defence available to an accused is sought to be diluted, cases pending before the sessions courts cannot be transferred, except in accordance with the procedure prescribed by Section 407(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, they submitted.

They submitted that the constitution of special court only for the trial of eight criminal complaints against them is violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and the secular fabric of the democratic polity.
The Judge quashed the government order on the sole ground that "a court constituted under Section 22 of NIA Act, 2008 is not included within the said definition of "court" under UAPA Act.