VIRENDRA SARAN, J. Heard Sri Anil Mullick learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Additional Government Advocate. 2. Charan Singh Bhatti S/o Gopi Chand R/o Noora, P. S. Phase II, Sector 39 Noida, District Ghaziabad is accused in Crime No. 134 of 199i of P. S. Phase II, Sector NOIDA, district Ghaziabad under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 353, 332, 326, 335, 227, 395 and 397, I. P. C. Sec. 3 (1) of the Prevention of Damage of Public Property Act, 1984, and Sees. 3 (1) and 4 of the Terrorist and Disptrutive Activities Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to the Act ). 3. The applicant is in jail for a very long time and his grievance is that his bail application is not being considered on account of the facts that no Designated Court is functioning at Meerut. This application came up before me on 24-6-1993 and directed the Registrar to report whether the Designated Court at Meerut was functioning or not. The report of the Registrar dated 25-6-93 shows that by G. O. No. 6695/vii-Nyaya-2-712/85, dated Februarys, 1993 and another G. O. No. 661/vi-Nyaya-2-712/85 of the same date, the Government has appointed the Sessions Judge, Meerut as Designated Court at Meerut for the trial and disposal of the cases falling under the act of ten districts including Ghaziabad. The report further shows that the office of the District and Sessions Judge, Meerut was lying vacant since January 24, 1993. Till the date of the report the likelihood of posting of a Sessions Judge in near future was there. I am now informed that a Sessions Judge has been posted at Meerut. 4. The prosecution case, in brief, as mentioned in the F. I. R. dated 18-12-1991 is that on 12-12-1991 at 12 noon Truck No. DM3 1556 hit the barrier put up by police of P. S. Sector 39, NOIDA. Constable Sher Singh, who was in sentry duty informed S. I. , S. S. Rana who accosted the truck driver. The truck proceeded about 50 paces and stopped blocking the read. Constable Sher Singh, who was in sentry duty informed S. I. , S. S. Rana who accosted the truck driver. The truck proceeded about 50 paces and stopped blocking the read. From the truck about 4 or 5 persons, armed with iron rod went towards Fajlu and the driver and his two or three companions engaged themselves in abusing constable Sher Singh and S. I. S. S. Rana, A crowd of about 200 or 300 people came near the barrier, some of them were armed with Lathi, Danda, iron rods and fire-arms, one of them Mahendra Bhatti exhortied his companions saying that the police officials had made the life of the people hell and they should be surrounded and done to death. Tue crowd which had assembled Sri Rana and some one from the crowd. hit Sri Rana with a rod, Sri Rana fired from his revolver. When Sri Rana fill down and became unconscious the crowd relieved Sri Rana of his revolver and cartridges. The incident was reported by wireless to the control room whereupon Sri R. K. Singh, Circle officer, NOIDA and the Jawans of P. A. C. arrived there. They tried to pacify the crowd but in vain. From the crowd Mahendra Btatti exhorted again, where upon Sri R. K. Singh, Circle Officer gave oral warning to the members of public assembled there to disperse but crowd started pelting brick bats toward the police and also committed loot and arosen and broke the telephone. They also set wireless set of the jeep of the Circle Officer to file. Thereupon the informant with his revolver and constable Ranvir Singh and P. A. C. men started firing. One of the members of the public namely Sant Ram son of Radhey Lal resident of Phudha, Sector 39, NOIDA was killed in firing. Some persons from the side of the police also received some injuries. After the police firing i he crowd dispersed creating hue and cry that the policeman should be beaten and killed. The crowd also set fire to two vehicles of fire brigade. Some persons of fire service also received injuries some private vehicles were also damaged. 5. The FIR of the case was lodged by S. O. , Sector 39, Ghaziabad against a very large number of persons. As many as, 58 persons were named in the FIR. 6. The crowd also set fire to two vehicles of fire brigade. Some persons of fire service also received injuries some private vehicles were also damaged. 5. The FIR of the case was lodged by S. O. , Sector 39, Ghaziabad against a very large number of persons. As many as, 58 persons were named in the FIR. 6. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that out of 58 persons named in the FIR 57 have already been granted bail and only the applicant is languishing in jail because his bail application is not being considered because pf the non-availability of the Designated Court. The above fact is also mentioned in Para 4 of the affidavit. Learned counsel has also filed certified copies of bail orders of 42 accused including Mahendra Singh Bhatti who was the main accused and the kingpin in the crime. 7. A perusal of the bail order dated January 10, 1993 in respect of co-accused Mahendra Singh Bhatti shows that the learned Designated court took note of the fact that there were amongst the accused respectable citizens of society. The learned Designated court found weight in the plea of co-accused Mahendra Singh Bhatti that violence sparked of due to the gunning down of Sant Ram by the police at P. S. Sector 39, NOIDA inside the Police Station and the same resulted in public at larte going wild and violent. The learned Designated court after a close scrutiny of the facts and circumstances of the case doubted whether the provision of the TADA were hardly applicable in the present case. 8. After giving my anxious consideration the allegations contained in the FIR and other materials placed on the record it does appear to me that the incident was not a pre planned affair. Even according to the FIR the trouble sparked of suddenly due to the accidental collision of the truck with the barrier and according to the defence police shot dead Santram in a cold blooded manner due to which feeling the public ran high and they retaliated. The provisions of TADA ought not to have been applied in the present case perhaps the same were applied because there was violence against the police officers. The provisions of TADA ought not to have been applied in the present case perhaps the same were applied because there was violence against the police officers. In the case of Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi and others v. Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya and others, 1991 SCC (Cri) 47, the Supreme Court has made the following observations :- "the Act is a penal statute. Its provisions are drastic in that they provide minimum punishments and in certain cases enhanced punishments also made confessional statements made to a police officer not below the rank of a Superintendent of Police admissible in evidence and mandates raising of rebuttable presumption on proof of facts stated in clauses (a) to (d) of sub-section (1) of Section 21, provision is also made in regard to the identification of an accused who is not traced through photographs. There are some of the special provisions introduced in the Act with a view to controlling the mence of terrorism. These provisions are a departure from the ordinary law since the said law was found to be inadequate and not sufficiently effective to deal with the special class of offenders indulging in terrorists and disruptive activities. There can, therefore, be no doubt that the legislature considered much crimes to be an aggravated nature which could not be checked or controlled under the ordinary law and enacted deterrent provi sions to combat that same. The legislature, therefore, made special provisions which can in certain respects be said to be harsh created a special forum for the speedy disposal of such cases, provided for raising a presumption of guilt, placed extra restrictions in regard to the release of the offender on bail and made suitable changes in the procedure with a view to achieving its objects. It is well-settled that status which impose a terms of imprisonment for what is a criminal offence under the law must be strictly construed. In Usmanbhai Dawoodbhai Memon v State of Gujarat, the court in paragraph 15 of the judgment observed as under (SCC p. 284 ). The act is an extreme measure to be resorted to when the police cannot tackle the situation under the ordinarily penal law. The intend-ment is to provide special machinery to combat the growing menace of terroriat is different parts of the country. The act is an extreme measure to be resorted to when the police cannot tackle the situation under the ordinarily penal law. The intend-ment is to provide special machinery to combat the growing menace of terroriat is different parts of the country. Since, however, the Act, is a drastic measure, it should not ordinarily be resorted to unless the Governments law enforcing machinary fails " the Act, is a drastic measure, it should not ordinarily be resorted o unless the Governments law enforcing machinary fails " distruptwe activities that resort should be had to the provisions of the Act. While invoking a crisal statute as the Act, the prosecution is duty bound to show from the of the case and the documents collected in the course toothed facts emerging therefrom prima facie constitute an within the letter of the law. When a statute provides enhanced punishments as compared to the punishments prescribed for similar offences under the ordinary penal laws of the country a higher responsibility and duty is cast on the Judge to make there exists prima facie evidence for supporting the charge levelled by the prosecution. Therefore, when a law visits a person with serious penal consequences extra care must be taken to ensure that those whom the Legislature did not intend to be covered hv the express language of the statute are not roped in by stretchino language of the law. 9. The object of TADA is to put down secessionist or insurgency active against the State and it should not be applied to ordinary crime for which provision exist in the IPC or in other laws. I am of prima facie opinion "that the provisions of TADA have been misused in the present case It is note that the misuse of TADA is becoming rampant. If the not checked without loss of time the provision of TADA MAY PROVP COUNTER PRODUCTIVE AND THE VERY PURPOSE of the Act would be defeated. However, since now the designated court is functioning at Meerut, the designated court shall examine this aspect of the case. 10. In case the applicant makes any bail application the learned desie nated Court/sessions Judge shall dispose of the same within one week in the light of the observations made above. 11. With the above observations/directions this application is finally disposed of. .