G. P. Mathur, J. - (1.) The Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports filed eight complaints against several persons including the respondents herein for their prosecution under S. 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC and S. 5 of Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The respondents (accused Nos. 3, 4 and 5) filed applications under S. 245, Cr. P. C. in all the cases praying for their discharge. These applications were rejected by the Special Court (Economic Offences) on February 24, 1986 and the revisions preferred against the said order were also dismissed by 6th Additional Sessions Judge on July 20, 1989. Thereafter, the Respondents filed petitions under S. 482, Cr. P. C. which were allowed by the High Court of Karnataka by the judgment and order dated August 7, 1995 and the orders passed by the Special Courts (Economic Offences) and the Sessions Judge were set aside and the applications filed under S. 245, Cr. P. C. were allowed and the respondents were discharged. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports has filed these appeals by special leave.
(2.) The main ground on which the petitions under S. 482, Cr. P. C. have been allowed by the High Court is that the Special Court (Economic Offences), Bangalore, had no jurisdiction to try the offences under the Indian Penal Code or any other law except the offences under the Acts mentioned in the Schedule to the Notification by which the said Special Court was created. The other grounds are that the complainant was not examined as a witness by the Special Court as required by S. 200, Cr. P. C. and that the Presiding Officer of the Special Court had not applied his judicial mind to the complaint before taking cognizance of the offences.
(3.) The Government of Karnataka, exercising powers conferred by proviso to sub-sec. (1) of S. 11 read with S. 2(j) of Code of Criminal Procedure and in consultation with the High Court of Karnataka issued a notification on September 10, 1982 for establishing a Special Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class called the Special Court (Economic Offences), for the trial of offences under the Acts specified in the Schedule having jurisdiction within the local area of the revenue district of Bangalore including the Bangalore Metropolitan Area. The Schedule mentioned 12 Acts including the Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, Income Tax Act, Customs Act, FERA and Central Excise and Salt Act, etc. The High Court accepted the contention of the accused-respondents herein that in view of the aforesaid notification the Special Court (Economic Offences) Court only try offences under the Acts mentioned in the Schedule but had no jurisdiction to try offences under the Indian Penal Code.;