IDRISHAN YAKUBHAN PATHAN versus STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

Citation: [2007] 8 S.C.R. 605 · Decided: 27-07-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

f 
----- ., 
.~. 
-) 
IDRISHAN Y AKUBHAN PA THAN 
v. 
STA TE OF GUJARAT TIIROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR 
JULY 27, 2007 
[DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND D.K. JAIN, JJ.] 
Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2000; Ss. 3(3), 4; 20, 21(2){b), 22(3), 
34(1)(4)/Penal Code, 1860; Ss. l 20(B), 286, 307 and 337/Explosive 
A 
B 
Substances Act, 1908; Ss. 3, 4 & 6: 
C 
Charges under Prevention of Terrorism Act-Initiation of proceedings 
against accused-Challenging the order of Special Court, POTA, two appeals 
filed by the accused-Acquitting him in one of the cases under POTA, High 
Court rejected his prayer for bail in the other case under POTA and dismissed 
the appeal-On appeal, Held: High Court was not justified in concluding D 
the matter in the later case in POTA in view of the observations made in the 
former case-Hence, the matter relating to criminal appeal in the later case, 
remitted to the High Court for consideration afresh. 
There were two proceedings initiated against the accused-appellant. 
The first was POTA Case No.08 of2003 and another was POTA Case No. 12 
E 
of 2003. Challenging the order of the Designated Judge, Special Court 
(POTA), two appeals were filed by the appellant, ie. Criminal Appeal Nos.1287 
of2004 and 1288 of2004. The appellant has been acquitted from the charges 
levelled against him in POTA Case No. 8 of2003. So far as the prayer for 
bail in POTA Case No.12 of2003 is concerned, certain observations were 
made by the Court while dismissing Criminal Appeal No.1287 of2004. Hence 
the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
F 
HELD: 1.1. The High Court noted that because of acquittal in POT A 
Case No.8 of2003 the appeal was infructuous. Obviously, the same relates G 
to Criminal Appeal No.1287 of2004. So far as the Criminal Appeal No.1288 
of 2004 is concerned, the same relates to the POT A Case No.12 of 2003. 
The High Court was, therefore, not justified in holding that the matter in 
605 
H 
606 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007) 8 S.C.R. 
A POT A Case No.12 of 2003 was concluded for various reasons in view of the 
observations made in the appeal relating to POT A Case NO. 8 of 2003. 
(Para 3) (607-8-C) 
1.2. In Criminal Appeal No. 1288 of 2004 which is related to POTA 
Case No.12 of 2003, w'tether any relief can be granted by the concerned Court 
B in that POTA Case was not considered by the High Court. The confusion 
ar"se before the High Court relating to the case numbers. In the 
circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and the matter relating to 
c 
D 
E 
Criminal Appeal No.1288 of 2004 is remitted to the High Court to consider 
).. 
the matter afresh in accordance with law. (Para 4) (607-D-F) 
2. It is clarified that no opinion has been expressed on the merits of the 
case. (Para 5) (607-F) 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 943 of 
2007. 
From the Judgment & Order 08.01.2007 of the High Court of Gujarat at 
Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 1288 of2004. 
Kamini Jaiswal for the Appellant. 
1-Iemanfika Wahi for the Respondent. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DR. ARIJIT PASAYA T, J. I. Leave granted. 
2. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by the Division Bench 
F of the Gujarat High Court dismissing the appeal filed under Section 34(1 )(4) 
of the Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2000 (in short the 'POTA'). There seems 
to be some confusion about the factual position and therefore the details are 
not necessary to be noted. 
G 
3. Undisputedly, the challenge before the High Court was to the order 
dated 7.7.2004 passed by the Designated Judge, Special Court (POTA) 
Ahmedabad. There were two proceedings initiated against the appellant. The 
first was Pota Case No. 08 of 2003 arising out of complaints, namely, I.C.R. 
No. 184 of2002 registered at Kagdapith Police Station, I.C.R. No. 116 of2002 
registered at Vejalpur Police Station and I.C.R. No. 244 of2002 registereCt at 
H Satellite Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 120(8), 307, 
I,._ 
·-) 
IORISHAN Y AKUBHAN PA TilAN v. STATE OF GUJARAT THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR [PASA Y AT, l.) 
60~ 
337, 286 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC') read with Sections A 
3, 4 & 6 of Explosive Substances Act, 1908 (in short the 'Explosive Act') and 
under Sections 3(3), 4,20, 21(2)(b) and 22(3) of the POTA. It is to be noted 
that two appeals were filed by the appellant i.e. Criminal Appeal Nos.1287 of 
2004 and 1288 of 2004. The appellant has been acquitted from the charges 
leveled against
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.