Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court of India today dismissed the appeal filed by the state of Jharkhand challenging the High Court’s order quashing the FIR filed against BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Manoj Tiwari in the Deoghar airport case.

A bench comprising of Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice Manmohan said, "The present appeal is disposed of with the liberty to the State of Jharkhand to forward the material collected during the investigation to the authorised officer under the Aircraft Act, 1934, within 4 weeks, who shall take a decision in accordance with the law as to whether a complaint needs to be filed under the Aircraft Act."

On 18 December, the Supreme Court of India had reserved its judgment on the state's plea challenging the Jharkhand High Court’s order quashing the FIR filed against BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Manoj Tiwari in the Deoghar airport case.

A bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Manmohan, while questioning the counsel for the state of Jharkhand observed, "How does Section 336 of the IPC apply here? Please read Section 441 of the IPC. Where is the intimidation? Please tell us how criminal trespass is attracted here. On a plain reading, which offence were they intending to commit? If Section 441 does not apply, the other two sections will not apply either."

Court made these observations in a case that arose from an FIR registered at the Kunda police station in the Deoghar district. It was alleged that nine individuals, including BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey, and Manoj Tiwari, forcibly pressured the Air Traffic Control (ATC) staff to approve their flight’s takeoff beyond the permissible time.

As per the FIR, the case includes charges under Sections 441 (criminal trespass), and 336 (endangering life or personal safety) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) as well as Sections under the Aircraft Act, 1934.

While quashing the FIR, the Jharkhand High Court had ruled that FIR was not maintainable while upholding Section 12B of the Aircraft Act. According to this provision, a court can only take cognisance under the Act only after a formal complaint is filed with the written sanction of the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA).

During the course of the proceedings, Senior counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand contended before the bench that the High Court quashed the FIR on the grounds that Section 12B of the Aircraft Act was invoked. The High Court held that the Aircraft Act is a special law, functioning as a code, and therefore offences under the IPC could not be investigated in this case. Additionally, it was of the view that no offence was made as per the allegations.

To this Justice Oka had asked, "Have you filed a complaint now? You can't file it now as there is a quashing order." In response, the counsel read Section 12B of the Aircraft Act and referred to the High Court's order, asserting that the FIR was not maintainable. He further contended before the bench that the case was at the investigation stage. To which, Justice Oka said, "You should have gone to the High Court and told them that you will file a complaint."

Justice Oka further had enquired as to how the CID investigated the matter under the Aircraft Act?" Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the accused, informed the court that specialised authorities are in place under the Act, adding that IPC could not apply when a special law, like the Aircraft Act, is already put in place.

Case Title - State of Jharkhand vs. Nishikant Dubey