https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174261 The Act was treated as a self-contained code for offences created by it, and the majority read its enforcement scheme to mean that the special police officer and his assistants alone could detect, prevent, and investigate those offences. Although the offences were cognizable, the powers of arrest, search, and related enforcement steps were linked to the special police officer rather than ordinary police machinery, so regular police investigation was excluded to avoid duplication and inconsistency. Mudholkar, J. dissented, holding that the Act did not expressly confer exclusive investigative power on the special police officer and that ordinary powers under the Criminal Procedure Code were not displaced. en-us Wed, 03 May 1961 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Oct 2015 14:11:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174261 The Act was treated as a self-contained code for offences created by it, and the majority read its enforcement scheme to mean that the special police officer and his assistants alone could detect, prevent, and investigate those offences. Although the offences were cognizable, the powers of arrest, search, and related enforcement steps were linked to the special police officer rather than ordinary police machinery, so regular police investigation was excluded to avoid duplication and inconsistency. Mudholkar, J. dissented, holding that the Act did not expressly confer exclusive investigative power on the special police officer and that ordinary powers under the Criminal Procedure Code were not displaced. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 03 May 1961 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174261