Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2006 DIGILAW 508 (MP)

Balram Mihani v. State of M. P.

2006-04-10

RAKESH SAKSENA

body2006
ORDER 1. Since all the aforesaid petitions involved the common question of law about the applicability and scope of the provisions of the Chapter VIIA of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code) incorporated in the Code by the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act. 1993 (Act No. 40 of 1993), all the aforesaid petitions arc being disposed of by this common order. 2. Through the aforesaid petitions the petitioners have challenged the jurisdiction of Judicial Magistrate First Class. Itarsi, for passing the orders dated 7. 12.2005 against them under section 105D and his Jurisdiction to proceed further under Chapter VIIA of the Code to make an order for attachment or forfeiture of their property in accordance with the provisions of sections 105D to 105J. Petitioners of Petition No. 10496/05 and 10497/05 have challenged the impugned order dated 7.12.2005 passed in Crime No. 852/05 registered by Police, Itarsi. and petitioners of Petition No.10538/05 have challenged the impugned order dated 7.12.2005 passed against Jittu alias Jitendra in Crime No. 857/05, whereby the Station, House Officer of Police Station Sohagpur and Station House Officer of Itarsi have been ordered to take all the steps necessary for tracing and identifying their properties. 3. Facts giving rise to these petitions are that Station House Officer, of Police Station Itarsi moved applications before the Judicial Magistrate First Class. Itarsi. for initiating proceedings against the petitioners Shankar Mihani and Jitendra Bhawsar under Chapter VIIA of the Code and to pass appropriate orders for attachment and forfeiture of the propel1y, which could he identified to have been derived from or used in the commission of offences and their criminal activities. According to police, petitioners Shankar Mihani and Jitendra Bhawsar were involved in criminal activities since a long time and had accumulated huge property derived directly or indirectly by their criminal and unlawful activities. Aforesaid properties were held by them either in their own names or in the name of their relatives. which were required to he identified and traced. hence. the police prayed for a direction under section 105D of the Code authorising them to take all necessary steps for tracing and identifying such property. 4. Aforesaid properties were held by them either in their own names or in the name of their relatives. which were required to he identified and traced. hence. the police prayed for a direction under section 105D of the Code authorising them to take all necessary steps for tracing and identifying such property. 4. In regard to unlawful and criminal activities of Shankar Mihani, it was alleged that he indulged in large scale of unlawful Satta business since 1997 and that he was arrested in around 11 cases registered against him under section 4A of Gambling Act. He was also wanted in Crime No. 852/05 registered for the similar offence. By his criminal activities he was accumulating huge wealth which required to be investigated. Police produced all the criminal record before the Magistrate along-with the statements of persons. who were involved in the aforesaid criminal activities under the supervision and direction of Shankar Mihani. According to police. by Satta business Shankar Mihani was earning around Rs.4.00.000/- daily. The properties derived from such activities were held by and under the names of his brothers Dharam Das. Dayal Das, Mahesh, Vasudco, Kanhaiya and other relatives and huge amount of cash was deposited in the branches of State Bank of India and Punjah National Bank in the name of brothers and family members. 5. Similar allegations were made by the police against the petitioner Jitendra Bhawsar. According to police. criminal history of the family of Jitendra Bhawsar began from the year 1985. Around 54 criminal cases were registered against Rajkumar Bhawsar and Jitendra Bhawsar. Records and crime numbers were produced before the Magistrate. Since the year 1996 Jitendra Bhawsar was indulging in illegal Satta business (Varli Matka), which had connection with Mumbai Salta Bazar. His family members were helping him in managing the income earned by unlawful and criminal activities. Under the directions of Jitendra Bhawsar number of persons were indulging in writing Satta Patti and receiving money from the Satta players through Satta business. His daily income was around Rs. 3,00,000/-. It is also alleged that he was connected with the persons involved in Varli Matka Mumbai and was involved' in unlawful currency transfers. It is alleged that by the inquiries it was found that between the year 1998 to 2005 he had earned around Rs.1.30.66.935/- from undisclosed sources. Similarly, Rajkumar Bhawsar had accumulated the property valuing around Rs.1,12.03,794/-. 3,00,000/-. It is also alleged that he was connected with the persons involved in Varli Matka Mumbai and was involved' in unlawful currency transfers. It is alleged that by the inquiries it was found that between the year 1998 to 2005 he had earned around Rs.1.30.66.935/- from undisclosed sources. Similarly, Rajkumar Bhawsar had accumulated the property valuing around Rs.1,12.03,794/-. Documents with respect to bank accounts and criminal activities were produced before the Magistrate. 6. Learned Magistrate, after due consideration of the allegations and the material adduced before him coupled with the affidavits of the concerned police officers, passed the impugned orders directing the concerned police officers to take all steps necessary for tracing and identifying such property. 7. On due consideration of the facts and material on record. I am of the veiw that the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the impugned orders do not disclose any ground on the basis of which it could be said that there was any reasonable ground to believe that the property had been obtained or derived by the petitioners from the commission of any offence have no force. 8. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the provisions of Chapter VIIA of the Code do not apply to the property situated within the territory of India and to the funds and property not utilised for the purpose of terrorist activities. According to them, an order under section 105C of .the Code can only be passed where the Court is satislied that there arc reasonable ground to believe that any property obtained by any persons is derived or obtained directly or indirectly. by such person from the commission of an offence in contracting State. 9. Learned counsel drew my attention to the aims and objects for enacting the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1993 (No. 40 of 1993) and suhmitted that it was proposed to amend the Code of Criminal Procedure to provide for (a) transfer of persons between the contracting states including the persons in custody for the purpose of assisting and investigation or giving evidence in proceedings. (b) attachment and forfeiture of property obtained or derived from the commission of offence which may have been or has been committed in other country and (c) involvement of attachment and forfeiture orders issued by Court in the other country, 10. Thus. (b) attachment and forfeiture of property obtained or derived from the commission of offence which may have been or has been committed in other country and (c) involvement of attachment and forfeiture orders issued by Court in the other country, 10. Thus. according to them the legislative intent for enacting the statute was to ensure that the crimes committed in other country by an Indian National or other person. who has taken shelter in other country be checked and the criminals may be brought to book, therefore, the action taken against the petitioners was illegal and void. 11. In support of their aforesaid contention learned counsel have placed reliance on an unreported decision rendered by Indore Bench of this Court on 28.3.2006 in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 1042/06 Ashok s/o Mahadeo Agrawal v. State of Madhya Pradesh [ 2006(2) JLJ 229 ] wherein it has been held that the provisions of section 105 as well as provisions of section 105C. 105D and 105G only apply to the territories which are foreign territories and in which by reciprocal arrangement provisions of the Code arc made applicable. 12. Learned counsel for the petitioners have also submitted that the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act. 1993 (Act No. 40 of 1993) has been repealed in the year 2001 by the Repealing and Amending Act, 2001, which came into force on 3rd September, 2001, therefore, the impugned orders passed by the Magistrate were without jurisdiction. 13. On the other hand, Shri T.S. Ruprah, Additional Advocate General, appearing for the State submitted that there is nothing 'in the statute, which prohibits the application of provisions of Chapter VIIA in regard to persons indulging in the criminal activity in India and deriving or obtaining property or value of property directly or indirectly as a result of criminal activities. He submits that there is no ambiguity in the provisions of section I 05A to 105L inserted as Chapter VIIA, therefore, there is no necessity to seek any help from the objects and reasons in interpreting the statute. Learned counsel submits that from the material adduced before the Magistrate the impugned orders directing the police to identify and trace the property of the petitioners is fully justified and the petitions filed by the petitioners deserved to be dismissed. Learned counsel submits that from the material adduced before the Magistrate the impugned orders directing the police to identify and trace the property of the petitioners is fully justified and the petitions filed by the petitioners deserved to be dismissed. He further submitted that in view of section 6A of the General Clauses Act, 1897, the repeal of Amending Act has no repercussion on the parent Act (Code), which together with the amendment remains unaffected. Since the Amending Act has served its purpose and has become unnecessary, it has been repealed without affecting the amendment inserted by it in the parent Act. 14. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the Court below. 15. Before adverting to the question of scope and applicability of the provisions inserted in Chapter VIIA of the Code it is essential to advert to the relevant provisions of law enacted under the aforesaid chapter. Chapter VIIA reads as under: "Reciprocal arrangements for assistance in certain matters and procedure for attachment and forfeiture of property 105A. Definitions. -- In this Chapter unless the context otherwise requires, - (a) 'contracting State' means any country or place outside India in respect of which arrangements have been made by the Central Government with the Government of such country through a treaty or otherwise; (b) 'identifying' includes establishment of a proof that the property was derived from, or used in the commission of an offence; (c) 'proceeds of crime' means any property derived or obtained directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity (including crime involving currency transfers) or the value of any such property; (d) 'property' means property and assets of every description whether corporeal or incorporeal, movable or immovable, tangible or intangible and deeds and instruments evidencing title to, or interest in, such property or assets derived or used in the commission of an offence and includes property obtained through proceeds of crime; (e) 'tracing' means determining the nature, source, disposition, movement, title or ownership of property. . 105B. Assistance in securing transfer of persons. . 105B. Assistance in securing transfer of persons. -- (1) Where a Court in India, in "relation to a criminal matter, desires that a warrant for arrest of any person to attend or produce a document or other thing issued by it shall be executed in any place in a contracting State, it shall send such warrant in duplicate in such form to such Court, Judge or Magistrate through such authority. as the Central Government may, by notification. specify in this behalf and that Court, Judge or Magistrate, as the case may be shall cause the same to be executed. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Code. if. in the course of an investigation or any inquiry into an offence. an application is made by the investigating officer or any officer superior in rank to the investigating officer that the attendance of a person who is in any place in a contracting State is required in connection with such investigation of inquiry and the Count is satisfied that such attendance is so required, it shall issue a summons or warrant. in duplicate, against the said person to such Count. Judge or Magistrate in such form as the Central Government may by notification. specify in this behalf, to cause the same to be served or executed. (3) Where a Court in India, in relation to a criminal matter, has received a warrant for arrest of any person requiring him to attend or attend and produce a document or other thing in that Court or before any other investigating agency. issued by a Court. .Judge or Magistrate in a contracting State, the same shall be executed as if it is the warrant received by it from another Count in India for execution within its local limits. (4) Where a person transferred to a contracting State pursuant to sub-section (3) is a prisoner in India, the Court in India or the Central Government may impose such conditions as that Court or Government deems lit. (5) Where the person transferred to India pursuant to sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) is a prisoner in a contracting State, the Count in India shall ensure that the conditions subject to which the prisoner is transferred to India are complied with and such prisoner shall be kept in such custody subject to such conditions as the Central Government may direct in writing. . 105C. . 105C. Assistance in relation to orders of attachment or forfeiture of property. -- (1) Where a Count in India has reasonable grounds to believe that any property obtained by any person is derived or obtained. directly or indirectly, by such person from the commission of an offence, it may make an order of attachment or forfeiture of such property, as it may deem tit under the provisions of section 105D to 105J (both inclusive). (2) Where the Court has made an order for attachment or forfeiture of any property under sub-section (1), and such property is suspected to be in a contracting State, the Count may issue a letter of request to a Count or an authority in the contracting State for execution of such order. (3) Where a letter of request is received by the Central Government from a Court or an authority in a contracting State requesting attachment or forfeiture of the property in India, derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person from the commission of an offence committed in that contracting State, the Central Government may forward such letter of request to the Court, as it thinks fit, for execution in accordance with the provisions of section 105D to 105J (both inclusive) or, as the case may be, any other law for the time being in force. 105D. Identifying unlawfully acquired property. -- (1) The court shall, under sub-section (1), or on receipt of a letter of request under sub-section (3) of section 105C, direct any police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police to take all steps necessary for tracing and identifying such property. (2) The steps referred to in sub-section (1) may include any inquiry, investigation or survey in respect of any person, place, property, assets, documents, books of account in any bank or public financial institutions or any other relevant matters. (3) Any inquiry, investigation or survey referred to in sub-section (2) shall be carried out by an officer mentioned in sub-section (1) in accordance with such directions issued by the said Court in this behalf. 105E. Seizure of attachment of property -- (1) Where any officer conducting an inquiry or investigation under section 105D has a reason to believe that any property in relation to which such inquiry or investigation is being conducted is likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which will. 105E. Seizure of attachment of property -- (1) Where any officer conducting an inquiry or investigation under section 105D has a reason to believe that any property in relation to which such inquiry or investigation is being conducted is likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which will. result in disposal of such property, he may make an order for seizing such property and where it is not practicable to seize such property, he may make an order of attachment directing that such property shall not be transferred or otherwise dealt with, except with the prior permission of the officer making such order, and a copy of such order shall be served on the person concerned. (2) Any other made under sub-section (1) shall have no effect unless the said order is confirmed by an order of the said Court, within a period of thirty days of its being made. 105F. Management of properties seized or forfeited under this Chapter. -- (1) The Court may appoint the District Magistrate of the area where the property is situate, or any other officer that may be nominated by the District Magistrate to perform the functions of an Administrator of such property. (2) The Administrator appointed under sub-section (1) shall receive and manage the property in relation to which the order has been made under sub-section (1) of section 105E or under section 105H in such manner and subject to such conditions as may be specified by the Central Government. (3) The Administrator shall also take such measures, as the Central Government may direct, to dispose of the property which is forfeiture to the Central Government. 105G. Notice of forfeiture of property. (3) The Administrator shall also take such measures, as the Central Government may direct, to dispose of the property which is forfeiture to the Central Government. 105G. Notice of forfeiture of property. -- (1) If as a result of the inquiry, investigation or survey under section 105D, the Court has reason to believe that all or any of such properties are proceeds of crime, it may serve a notice upon such person (hereinafter referred to the person affected) calling upon him within a period of thirty days specified in the notice to indicate the source of income, earnings or assets, out of which or by means of which he has acquired such properly, the evidence on which he relies and other relevant information and particulars, and to show cause why all or any of such properties, as the case may be should not be declared to be proceeds of crime and forfeited to the Central Government. (2) Where a notice under sub-section (1) to any person specifies any property as being held on behalf of such person by any other person, a copy of the notice shall also be served upon such other person. 105H. Forfeiture of property in certain cases. -- (1) The Court may, after considering the explanation, if any, to the show cause notice issued under section 105G and the material available before it and after giving to the person affected (and in a case where the person affected holds any property specified in the notice through any other person, to such other person also) a reasonable opportunity of being heard. by order, record a finding whether all or any of the properties in question are proceeds of crime: Provided that if the person affected (and in a case where the person affected holds any property specified in the notice through any other persons such other person also) does not appear before the Court or represent his case before it within a period of thirty days specified in the show cause notice, the Court may proceed to record a finding under this sub-section ex parte on the basis of evidence available before it. (2) Where the Court is satisfied that some of the properties referred, to in the show cause notice are proceeds of crime but it is not possible to identify specifically such properties, then it shall be lawful for the Court to specify the properties which, to the best of its judgment, arc proceeds of crime and record a finding accordingly under sub-section (1). (3) Where the Court records a finding under this section to the effect that any property is proceeds of crime, such property shall stand forfeited to the Central Government free from all encumbrances. (4) Where any shares in a company stand forfeited to the Central Government under this section, then, the company shall notwithstanding anything contained in the Companies Act, 1956 (1of 1956) or the articles of association of the company, forthwith register the Central Government as the transferee of such shares. 105-I. Fine in lieu of forfeiture. -- (1) Where the Court makes a declaration that any property stand forfeited to the Central Government under section 105H and it is a case where the source of only a part of such property has not been proved to the satisfaction of the Court, it shall make an order giving an option to the person affected to pay, in lieu of forfeiture. a tine equal to the market value of such part. (2) Before making an order imposing a tine under sub-section (1), the person affected shall be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard. (3) Where the person affected pays the fine due under sub-section (1), within such time as may be allowed in that behalf, the Court may, by order, revoke the declaration of forfeiture under section 105H and thereupon such property shall stand released. 105-J. Certain transfers to be null and void. -- (1) Where after the making of an order under sub-section (1) of section 105E or the issue of a notice under section 105G, any property referred to in the said order or notice is transferred by any mode whatsoever such transfers shall. for the purposes of the proceedings under this Chapter. he ignored and if such property is subsequently forfeited to the Central Government under section 105H, then. the transfer of such property shall he deemed to he null and void, 105-K, Procedure in respect of letter of request. -- Every letter of request. summons or warrant. for the purposes of the proceedings under this Chapter. he ignored and if such property is subsequently forfeited to the Central Government under section 105H, then. the transfer of such property shall he deemed to he null and void, 105-K, Procedure in respect of letter of request. -- Every letter of request. summons or warrant. received by the Central Government from. and every letter of request. summons or warrant. to be transmitted to a contracting State under this Chapter shall he transmitted to a contracting State or, as the case may he. send to the concerned Court in India in such form and in such manner as the Central Government may, by notification, specify in this behalf. 105-L. Application of this chapter. -- The Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette. direct that the application of this Chapter in relation to a contracting State with which reciprocal arrangements have been made. shall he subject to such conditions. exceptions or qualifications as are specified in the said notification: 16. The moot point is what is the width of the ambit of the provision of section I 05D of the Code of Criminal Procedure in relation to property'? 17. Sub-section (1) of the provision authorises taking of the necessary steps in respect of such property as has been deciphered in the Definition. Section 105A(d) is the property having connection with crime. It is pertinent to note in the context that neither the crime has been categorised about its nature and place of commission nor the property has been delimited about its location in India or outside India. The only qualification attached to the property to be dealt with under the provision is that it should carry connection with crime. 18. This view is re-affirmed by the provision of section 105(c) which clearly evidences that the one single condition that enables the Court to make an order of attachment or forfeiture of such property is that it should have a reasonable ground to believe that it has been directly or indirectly obtained from commission of an offence, the nature of offence or the place of its commission is again not circumscribed. As regards the mode of attachment of forfeiture, the latter part of the provision leaves it to the discretion of the Court to do it as it deems fit under the provisions of section 1050 to 105J (both inclusive). 19. As regards the mode of attachment of forfeiture, the latter part of the provision leaves it to the discretion of the Court to do it as it deems fit under the provisions of section 1050 to 105J (both inclusive). 19. In the context, the provision of section 105D (1) makes a significant 'reading : The Court shall - under sub-section (1) or on receipt of request under sub-section (3) of section 105C, direct any police officer not below the rank of Sub-Inspector of Police to take all steps necessary for tracing and identifying such property. 20. It is quite evident that the former part of the provision covered by sub-section (1) is quite independent of the latter part covered by subsection (3) and is also untagged by similar or any other conditions. And it too expressly empowers the Court to issue the direction, as envisaged by the operative part of the provision, in respect of property not referred to in sub-section 105C(3) as well i.e. any property alleged or suspected to be connected with commission of crime, if not otherwise inhibited by any law. 21. Moreover. it will be contrary to all reason to assume that the Legislature would have been interested only to check property crime abroad in assailing it altogether in the country. 22. As respects the Aims and Objects of the law or the Act, it must be manifest that the text of the law has to prevail over the Aims and Objects, as the Text, and not the Aims and Objects, is voted by the Legislature into law. To the extent of the conflict between the two, the professed Aims and Objects have to give way to the Text of the law, it is only in case of obscurity or ambiguity in the Text that the Aims and Objects lend a helping hand in extracting the true intention of the Legislature to arrive at the real import or meaning of the text of the provision of law. 23. On careful perusal of the provision incorporated in Chapter VIIA, it is abundantly clear that the Legislature has enacted the aforesaid provision for identifying and tracing the property derived from or used in commission of an offence. The term "identifying" includes establishment of a proof that the property was derived from or used in commission of an offence. 23. On careful perusal of the provision incorporated in Chapter VIIA, it is abundantly clear that the Legislature has enacted the aforesaid provision for identifying and tracing the property derived from or used in commission of an offence. The term "identifying" includes establishment of a proof that the property was derived from or used in commission of an offence. Similarly, the proceeds of crime means any property derived or obtained directly or indirectly by any person as a result of criminal activity (including crime involving currency transfers) or the value of any such property in the aforesaid definitions. There is nothing to indicate that the property should have been derived from or used in commission of an offence in any place or country outside India. There is nothing to indicate that the property with respect to which orders can be passed under this chapter should be located in the contracting State or by the commission of an offence of terrorism. It would be preposterous to hold that only that property can be identified and can be seized or attached under the provisions of Chapter VIIA which is established or proved to have been derived or used in the commission of an offence outside India. In the interpretation of the various provisions enacted in Chapter VIIA, a plain and simple meaning of the definition is significant. 24. From the perusal of section 105B it is apparent that the powers and jurisdiction conferred on a Court in India under sections 105C, 1050, 105E, 1050 & 105H can also be exercised in relation to a criminal matter requiring a warrant for arrest of any person to attend or to produce a document or thing, to be executed in any place in a contracting State. Section 105B provides only the procedure and the manner in which the Court in India can execute its orders passed or to be passed in Chapter VIIA. The enactment of section 105B is for the purpose of extending assistance in the investigation and prosecution of crime and tracing its taint and confiscation of proceeds of crime and terrorists funds with a view to check the criminal activities in India. Any interpretation restricting or circumscribing the jurisdiction of the Court under Chapter VIIA only in relation to the contacting State shall result in absurdity. 25. Any interpretation restricting or circumscribing the jurisdiction of the Court under Chapter VIIA only in relation to the contacting State shall result in absurdity. 25. If a statutory provision is open to more than one interpretation the Court has to choose that interpretation which represents the true intention of the Legislature, in other words, the legal meaning or true meaning of the statutory provision. The Court has, therefore, to look essentially to the words of statute to discern the true meaning. Though the words of statute "when there is doubt about their meaning" are to be understood in the. sense in which they best harmonies with the subject of enactment and the object which the Legislature has in view. However, the object oriented approach cannot be carried out to the extent of doing violence to the plain language used in writing by re-writing the section or substituting words in place of actual words used by the Legislature. 26. So far as the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that due to repeal of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1993 (Act No. 40 of 1993) the provisions of Chapter VIIA have become non-existent and the Magistrate had no jurisdiction to pass the impugned orders, I am of the considered view that it is devoid of merit. The relevant part of section 4 of the Repealing and Amending Act, 2001 (No. 30 of 2001) provides: "4. Savings. -- The repeal by this Act of any enactment shall not affect any other enactment in which the repealed enactment has been applied, incorporated or referred to; xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx" It is thus evident that though the Act No. 40 of 1993 is repealed wholly yet its incorporation in the Code is manifestly saved therein by the Saving Clause of the repealing Act and. hence. remains unaffected. Besides that section 6A of the General Clauses Act, 1897 provides: "S. 6A. Repeal of Act making textual amendment in Act or Regulation. -- Where any Central Act or Regulation made after commencement of this Act repeals any enactment by which the text of any Central Act or Regulation was amended by the express omission, insertion or substitution of any matter. then, unless a different intention appears. Repeal of Act making textual amendment in Act or Regulation. -- Where any Central Act or Regulation made after commencement of this Act repeals any enactment by which the text of any Central Act or Regulation was amended by the express omission, insertion or substitution of any matter. then, unless a different intention appears. the repeal shall not affect the continuance of any such amendment made by the enactment so repealed and in operation at the time of such repeal." 27. In view of the above legal position. it is apparent that the object of the Repealing and Amending Act is not to bring in any change of law but to remove enactment which has become unnecessary. Mostly, Repealing Acts •expurgate Amending Acts. because after having incorporated the amendment of the main Acts those Acts have served their purpose and have no further reason for their existence. See Jethanand v. State of Delhi [AIR 1968 SC 89] and Indian Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. Commercial Tax Officer [ AIR 1975 SC 155 ]. 28. In view of the above discussion I am of the view that section 105A to 105J of the Code of Criminal Procedure apply to the local area in India as well as LO the foreign territories in which by reciprocal arrangements provisions of the Code are made applicable. 29. Since, I am in respectful disagreement with the view taken in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 1042/06 Ashok v. State of Madhya Pradesh [ 2006(2) JL.J 229 ], that the provisions under section 105 as well as the provisions of Chapter VIIA of the Code apply only to the territories which are foreign territories in which by reciprocal arrangements provisions of the Code are applicable, I feel constrained to refer this case to the larger Bench for consideration of question as to "whether the provisions of section 105A to 105L incorporated in Chapter VIIA of the Code of Criminal Procedure are applicable only to the territories which are foreign territories and in which by reciprocal agreement provisions of the Code are made applicable or the provisions are applicable within the territories of India also." 30. Files of the cases be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for necessary action and appropriate orders.