SC agrees to hear plea challenging National Investigation Agency (Amendment) Act, 2019, tells Centre to reply within four weeks

The plea claimed that after the amendments in the NIA Act, the offences unrelated to terrorism such as trafficking of minors for sexual exploitation have also been included in the purview of the Act, therefore further usurping the powers of state investigation agencies

Press Trust of India January 20, 2020 22:40:59 IST
SC agrees to hear plea challenging National Investigation Agency (Amendment) Act, 2019, tells Centre to reply within four weeks
  • The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a plea challenging the amendments made in the National Investigation Agency (Amendment) Act, 2019

  • A bench of Justices F Nariman and SRavindra Bhat issued notice to the Centre and sought its reply within four weeks

  • The plea filed by organisation 'Solidarity Youth Movement' says that the new amendment has diluted the nature and operation of the Act

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear a plea challenging the amendments made in the National Investigation Agency (Amendment) Act, 2019, on the ground that it gives "unfettered discretionary powers" to the Centre.

A bench of Justices F Nariman and S Ravindra Bhat issued notice to the Centre and sought its reply within four weeks.

SC agrees to hear plea challenging National Investigation Agency Amendment Act 2019 tells Centre to reply within four weeks

Representational image. Reuters

The plea filed by organisation 'Solidarity Youth Movement' says that the new amendment has diluted the nature and operation of the Act, which was enacted to prosecute offences affecting national security, by incorporating legislations unrelated to terrorism.

The petition filed through advocate Jaimon Andrews, alleges that the Act "unconstitutionally" concentrates investigative and prosecutorial activities which would otherwise have been within the purview of respective state governments where offences have been committed.

"In addition to its unconstitutional concentration of powers, no objective and third-party empirical data has been provided as to the inability or the incompetence of the state investigation agencies to carry out investigations and prosecution," the petition said.

It claimed that after the amendments in the Act, the offences unrelated to terrorism such as trafficking of minors for sexual exploitation has also been included in the purview of the Act, therefore further usurping the powers of state investigation agencies. "The statement of object of the Act clearly states that the underlying purpose is to constitute a national investigation agency which would be empowered to register, investigate and prosecute offences wherein the national security, national integrity, sovereignty, friendly relations with foreign states, and offences under the Act enacted pursuant to international treaties, agreements, are affected," it said.

The petition said that with the impugned amendments, the purview of the law was broadened.

"The amendment has incorporated offences pertaining to trafficking of persons and minors for sexual exploitation or forced labour, possession, usage, making, delivery of counterfeited currency notes, which are wholly unrelated to countering terrorism," it added.

The plea said that the "co-operative federalism, which is the fundamental pillar of governmental functioning has been diluted by this amendment".

On 15 January, the Congress-led Chhattisgarh government had also moved the apex court seeking the UPA-1 era NIA Act be declared unconstitutional and arbitrary on the ground that it affects the state's sovereignty and confers unbridled power on the Centre.

The then Manmohan Singh government had come out with the law in the aftermath of the 2008 Mumbai attack, when senior Congress leader P Chidambaram was the union home minister. The legislation provides NIA concurrent jurisdiction to probe terror attacks in any part of the country without any specific permission from states and in the last one decade it has been involved in the investigation of all such cases.

The Chhattisgarh government filed the original suit under Article 131 of the Constitution which empowers a state to move the Supreme Court directly in matters of dispute with the Centre or any other state. It is the first state to challenge the Act.

Updated Date:

Find latest and upcoming tech gadgets online on Tech2 Gadgets. Get technology news, gadgets reviews & ratings. Popular gadgets including laptop, tablet and mobile specifications, features, prices, comparison.

also read

Joe Biden to pick Merrick Garland, judge Republicans snubbed for SC seat in 2016, as attorney-general
World

Joe Biden to pick Merrick Garland, judge Republicans snubbed for SC seat in 2016, as attorney-general

In picking Garland, Biden is turning to an experienced judge who held senior positions at the justice department decades ago, including as a supervisor of the prosecution of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing

'No improvement in situation on ground', says SC on govt's consultation with protesting farmers on three laws
India

'No improvement in situation on ground', says SC on govt's consultation with protesting farmers on three laws

The Supreme Court posted all the petitions concerning the farmers’ issue on Monday (11 Jan), after the Centre informed the CJI-lead bench that ‘healthy discussions’ are going on between the government and farmers

'Suspend implementation of farm laws or we will do it': SC lashes out at Centre over handling of farmer protests
India

'Suspend implementation of farm laws or we will do it': SC lashes out at Centre over handling of farmer protests

The court further said it is 'extremely disappointed' with the way negotiations are going on between the Centre and the farmers on the new farm laws