- (1.) R. K. Saksena, J. By his order dated 30-3-1990 the Special Judge Farrukhabad, deriving powers under the Uttar Pradesh Dacoity Affected Areas Act, 1983 took cognizance of an offence, prima facie, punishable under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code and directed for issuance of non bailable warrant of arrest to procure the attendance of these five applicants, namely, Amar Singh, Mahendra, Ram Krishna, Nek Ram and Jogeshwar in Crime Case No. 47 of 1988 under Section 396, I. P. C. Police Station Nawabganj District Farrukhabad. The correctness and the propriety of this order has been assailed by the said persons by means of this revision.
(2.) IT appears that the police had, after usual investigation, submitted a final report. Thereupon notice was issued to the victim of the alleged incident, who entered appearance, gave an application challenging the conclusion recorded by the Investigating Officer and filed affidavits also in support of his allegations that the crime had been committed by these persons. After a conspectus of all the materials placed before him, the learned Special Judge passed the impugned order. The learned counsel for the revisionists contended that the Special Judge should have taken recourse to the provisions contained in Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure specially when the J investigating agency had submitted final report. The contention in my opinion, is devoid of merit. The said Act provides special procedure and power of Special Court created under the Act for trying a scheduled offence. In accordance with the provisions of Section 7 of the Act, Special Courts can take cognizance of any scheduled offence even on receipt of an information from any person other than a police officer vide Section 7 (c ). In the instant case, the material on record shows that the complainant had appeared and had assailed the con clusion recorded by the Investigating Officer by filing a protest petition and affidavits. This was sufficient for taking cognizance of the offence and it is no where provided that after taking cognizance in a situation like this, the Special Court shall resort to and follow the procedure prescribed under Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. I may further point out that even a Magistrate is empowered to proceed straightaway on receipt of a complaint after taking cognizance of the offence and can issue process with out resorting to the provisions of Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Pro cedure. Likewise the Special Judge can legally proceed to the culprits. From the order under revision it is manifest that the Special Judge applied his mind 10 the material placed before him and then passed the impugned order. The learned counsel for the revisionists points out that non-bailable warrant for the arrest of the applicants has been issued even in the first instance for which there was no special circumstance. The applicants have remedy open. They can enter appearance before the court concerned and apply for bail. If an application to that effect is moved, the Special Judge would do well to dispose it of, if possible, on the same day.
(3.) THE revision is dismissed. Revision dismissed. .;