The Supreme Court has held the Aircraft Act was
"a complete code" to deal with the safety and security of civil
aviation and aerodrome whereas the state police could only forward probe
material to the authorised officer to decide on lodging a complaint.
The significant verdict, ruling out any significant
role of a state police in dealing with the airport violations cases, came from
a bench comprising Justices A S Oka and Manmohan on an appeal of the Jharkhand
government.
The state government challenged the Jharkhand High
Court judgement which quashed the FIR against BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Manoj
Tiwari and others.
They were accused of allegedly forcing the Deoghar
air traffic control to allow their aircraft to take off after sunset in 2022.
The judgement, authored by Justice Manmohan, and
made available on Wednesday said, "The Aircraft Act, 1934 as well as the
rules framed thereunderis a complete Code which deals with safety and security
of civil aviation and aerodrome." It added, The Aircraft Act also prescribes
a special procedure for taking cognisance of any offence punishable under the
Aircraft Act, 1934, i.e., the complaint must be made by or with the prior
sanction of the Aviation authorities. Section 12B is in the nature of a
pre-condition for taking cognizance by a court.
The bench referred to the relevant provisions of the
Act and the rules and said a complaint could be filed by an authorised officer
alone under the Aircrafts Act before the court concerned.
The local police can only forward the material
collected by it during the investigation to such authorised officers. It shall
be open to the authorised officer to take a decision in accordance with law
with regard to filing or non-filing of a complaint, it said.
The bench said it was a settled law that in the
exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 of the Constitution or
the inherent powers under Section 482 of CrPC, it was open to a high court to
quash an FIR either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise
to secure the ends of justice.
Keeping in view the findings, the present appeals
are dismissed with liberty to the appellate-state of Jharkhand to forward the
material collected by it during investigation to such authorised officer under
the Aircraft Act within four weeks, who shall take a decision in accordance
with law as to whether a complaint needs to be filed under the Aircraft Act and
the rules framed thereunder, the bench said.
The verdict said there was no evidence that the MPs
acted rashly or negligently to endanger lives and hence no offence under
Section 336 IPC (endangering human life) was made out against them.
It also held that no offence of Section 447
(criminal trespass) was made out as there was no allegation of forcible entry,
intimidation, or annoyance by the lawmakers.
On invocation of Section 448 (house trespass) IPC,
the bench ruled that the ATC office, not being a dwelling or place of worship,
does not fall under this provision.
The top court, in December 18 last year, reserved
its verdict on the appeal of the state government against the Jharkhand High
Court judgement.
The case relates to an FIR lodged at Kunda police
station in Deoghar district of Jharkhand against nine people, including Dubey
and Tiwari.
They had allegedly forced Deoghar ATC personnel to
clear their chartered flight to take off after the scheduled permitted time on
August 31, 2022 in violation of security protocol at airports.
The flight reportedly departed at 6:17 PM, 14
minutes after sunset.
The top court's verdict came on a petition by the
Jharkhand government challenging a March 13, 2023 high court ruling which
quashed the FIR on grounds that no prior sanction was taken from Lok Sabha
secretariat as per the Aircraft (Amendment) Act, 2020.