2007 (12) TMI 534 - SC - Indian Laws

Appeal allowed as trial lacked proper sanction under TADA. Conviction set aside. Jurisdiction is crucial.

The appeal under section 19 of TADA against the conviction under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 was allowed. The appellant's conviction was set aside ... - Issues involved: Appeal u/s 19 of TADA against conviction under Explosive Substances Act, 1908 without proper sanction under TADA.Summary:1. The prosecution alleged that the appellant was found with explosive powder leading to his conviction under Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. However, the charge-sheet did not mention any offence under TADA or the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 initially. 2. The appellant was tried without the required sanction under TADA, as mandated by Section 20A(2). The Designated Court lacked jurisdiction to proceed with the trial under TADA without the necessary sanction.3. The Designated Court's power to try offences under TADA is contingent upon having jurisdiction over the TADA offence. Without proper sanction, the Designated Court cannot try any related offences.4. Referring to legal definitions, jurisdiction is the court's authority to decide a case. Without jurisdiction, the court's decisions are invalid.5. The introduction of TADA charges in a supplementary charge-sheet without proper sanction rendered the Designated Court's jurisdiction invalid. The appellant's conviction under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 was deemed illegal.6. Citing precedent, the absence of valid sanction deprives the Designated Court of jurisdiction to try the case. Any proceedings undertaken without proper sanction are considered null and void.7. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, the appellant's conviction under the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 was set aside, and the appellant was to be released unless required in another case.