This article is written by Janvi Johar, 2nd year student pursuing B.A.LLB (H) from Amity University, Noida.
The State of Uttar Pradesh vs Aman Mittal
(Supreme Court of India)
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 1328-1329 of 2019)
(SLP (Criminal) Nos. 9981-9982 of 2017)
(4th September 2019)
Bench of Judges
- Justice Nageswara Rao
- Justice Hemant Gupta
Facts of the Case
An FIR was lodged on April 28, 2017, in Police Station Cantt, Lucknow for the offences punishable under Sections 265, 267,420, 24, 120B of IPC 1860 and Section 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1952 in respect of short delivery of petrol and diesel. Later 24 electronic chips were found and sent to the Forensic Lab for testing. These electronic chips were controlled by a remote and were found in the dispensing units.
The Investigating Officer filed an application for judicial remand. This application was accepted by the magistrate as to grant permission for the investigation. This application was later challenged. This application was again challenged in the High Court as the Trial Court dismissed it. The High Court quashed the offences under section 265 and 267 of the Indian Penal Code 1860.
An appeal was file before the apex court challenging the order of the High Court.
- Prevalence of Special Law over General Law?
- The validity of the ground of arrest?
- Whether the offences will be under the Indian Penal Code 1860 and the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 or under the Legal Metrology Act 2009.
Statutes & Provisions Involved
- The Indian Penal Code, 1860
- The Legal Metrology Act, 2009
- The Information technology Act, 2000
Judgments Relied Upon
- M. C. Abraham and Another v. State of Maharashtra and Others
- State of Maharashtra v. Sayyed Hassan
- Sangeetaben Mahendrabhai Patel v. State of Gujarat & Anr
- Khoday Distilleries Ltd. & Ors. v. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd
- R.S. Raghunath v. State of Karnataka
- CTO v. Binani Cements Ltd.
In the prevalence of Special Law over General Law, the Apex Court held that section 3 of Income Tax Act, 1995 completely overrides the provisions of Chapter XIII of Indian Penal Code, 1860. At the same time, the prosecution under other offences of IPC has been found to be maintainable.
The Supreme Court has reiterated that the High Court while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code, cannot interfere in the manner of investigation. The Supreme Court quashed the offences under Sections 265 and 267 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, thereby dismissing the directions given by the High Court.
State of Uttar Pradesh vs Aman Mittal State of Uttar Pradesh vs Aman Mittal State of Uttar Pradesh vs Aman Mittal State of Uttar Pradesh vs Aman Mittal