In Brief
Three men, including Ebha Arjun Jadeja, were arrested on 10 April 1995 after police recovered prohibited firearms from their vehicle. They were prosecuted under both the Arms Act and TADA Act. The accused challenged their TADA prosecution, arguing that the police had recorded the initial information without the mandatory prior approval of the District Superintendent of Police required by Section 20-A(1) of the TADA Act. The Supreme Court held that this requirement is mandatory and cannot be cured by later approval. However, the Court distinguished situations where the primary offence is serious (murder, rape, narcotics) and TADA charges are ancillary. Here, since the arms recovery was the sole offence and constituted a TADA Act violation in a notified area, the lack of prior sanction was fatal. The Court discharged the appellants from TADA charges but allowed prosecution under the Arms Act.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.