NIA takeover under the 2008 Act: State police may continue investigation until records are handed over.

Under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, a Central Government direction for the NIA to take over a scheduled offence does not, by itself, end the State police's role; the State police may continue the investigation until the records are actually handed over to the Agency, and any charge-sheet filed before that takeover remains valid. Exclusive Special Court jurisdiction also arises only after the NIA actually assumes investigation; until then, the court otherwise competent under the Code may take cognizance and commit the case for trial. The later transfer to the NIA Special Court does not retrospectively invalidate prior proceedings.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether, after the Central Government directed the National Investigation Agency to take over a scheduled offence, the State police could continue the investigation and file the charge-sheet until the agency actually received the records; (ii) whether the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nanded, had jurisdiction to take cognizance and commit the case for trial before the Special Court designated under the Code until the National Investigation Agency took over the investigation.

Issue (i): whether, after the Central Government directed the National Investigation Agency to take over a scheduled offence, the State police could continue the investigation and file the charge-sheet until the agency actually received the records.

Analysis: Section 6 of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 was construed as a coordinated scheme. The direction under sub-section (4) or (5) disables the State Government and its police from proceeding further, but sub-section (7), introduced for the removal of doubts, obliges the officer in charge of the police station to continue the investigation until the Agency actually takes it up. The provision was read harmoniously with Section 10, which preserves the State Government's investigative powers unless expressly taken away. Applying this construction, the mere issuance of the direction and renumbering of the case by the Agency did not amount to the Agency having taken over the investigation; that occurred only when the records were actually handed over.

Conclusion: the State police was entitled to continue the investigation and the charge-sheet filed before the Agency took over was valid.

Issue (ii): whether the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nanded, had jurisdiction to take cognizance and commit the case for trial before the Special Court designated under the Code until the National Investigation Agency took over the investigation.

Analysis: The exclusive jurisdiction under Sections 11, 13 and 16 of the National Investigation Agency Act attaches to scheduled offences investigated by the Agency. Before the Agency takes over, jurisdiction remains with the court otherwise competent under the Code. The existence of a State-notified remand court and Special Court under the Code meant that the Chief Judicial Magistrate could take cognizance and commit the matter. The later transfer to the National Investigation Agency Special Court did not retrospectively invalidate the prior proceedings, and the principle that an invalid investigation does not by itself vitiate cognizance or trial reinforced that result.

Conclusion: the Chief Judicial Magistrate had jurisdiction to take cognizance and commit the case for trial before the designated Special Court.

Final Conclusion: the appeals failed, the High Court's judgment was affirmed, and the proceedings before the State-designated courts were upheld until the National Investigation Agency actually assumed investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, the State police may continue investigating a scheduled offence until the National Investigation Agency actually takes over the case, and exclusive Special Court jurisdiction arises only after such takeover.

---