Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Supreme Court Affirms NIA's Jurisdiction in Explosive Substances Act Case: "Transfer of Investigation to NIA is Valid"

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the jurisdiction of the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in a case concerning offenses punishable under the Explosive Substances Act. The Court's decision came in response to Special Leave Petitions (Criminal) Nos. 6283-6286 of 2023, wherein the State of West Bengal & Ors had challenged the High Court's order to transfer the investigation to the NIA.

The High Court of Judicature at Calcutta, through a Division Bench order on 27th April 2023, directed the NIA to take over the investigation of six First Information Reports (FIRs) registered by the police in West Bengal. These FIRs were related to distinct incidents occurring between 30th March and 3rd April 2023.

The petitioners contended that the injuries sustained by the complainant were inconsistent with the alleged use of explosives. They also pointed out that multiple police officers were involved in the investigation and argued that the direction to transfer the case to the NIA was unwarranted.

However, the Solicitor General of India, representing the NIA, along with other counsel, supported the High Court's order for the transfer of investigation.

In the judgment delivered on 24th July 2023, the Supreme Court observed that the Central Government had already exercised its powers under Section 6(5) of the National Investigation Agency Act, issuing a notification for NIA's investigation. The Court clarified that it was not within its remit to decide the sufficiency or veracity of the allegations at this stage. It further affirmed the High Court's judgment, holding that the exercise of jurisdiction by the NIA was valid.

The Court's ruling stated, "The precise contours of the investigation which should be carried out by the NIA cannot be anticipated or restricted at this stage."

With the Supreme Court's decision, the NIA shall proceed with the investigation in accordance with the law, and all the relevant documents and records have been duly transferred to the agency.

Date of Decision: 24th July 2023

The State of West Bengal & Ors vs Suvendu Adhikari & Ors

Latest Legal News