Delhi High Court – Orders
Syed Ali Niwas Aliasfaheem Khan Alias … vs National Investigating Agency on 7 April, 2026
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~30
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ CRL.A. 6/2026 & CRL.M.A. 142/2026, CRL.M.A. 143/2026
SYED ALI NIWAS ALIASFAHEEM KHAN ALIAS SIRAJ IN JC
.....Appellant
Through: Md. Mobin Akhtar with Md. Saad,
Advs.
versus
NATIONAL INVESTIGATING AGENCY .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Rahul Tyagi, SPP with Mr. Jatin
Khatri, Mr. Amit Rohila, Mr.
Priyansh Rahi Singh, Advs.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
ORDER
% 07.04.2026
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The present appeal has been filed under Section 21 of the National
Investigation Agency, Act 2008 (hereinafter “NIA Act“) read with Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the impugned judgment
dated 23rd July, 2024 and order on sentence dated 31st August, 2024, passed
by ld. Additional Sessions Judge-03, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi in
Sessions Case No. 132/2020, arising out of RC No. 5/2020/NIA/DLI
registered at P.S. Special Cell, Delhi. Vide the impugned order, the Appellant
has been convicted under Section 186/353/307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860
and 25/27 of the Arms Act, 1959.
3. In the present case, initially the FIR No. 05/2020 was filed on 9th
January, 2020 at P.S. Special Cell in respect of offences punishable under
CRL.A. 6/2026 Page 1 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2026 at 20:53:19
Sections 353/186/307 read with Section 34 of IPC, and Sections 25 and 27 of
the Arms Act. Thereafter, on 30th January, 2020, the National Investigating
Agency (hereinafter “NIA”) had registered a case bearing FIR No.: RC-
05/2020/NIA/DLI in respect of scheduled offences under the NIA Act. In the
said FIR, Sections 18, 38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act,
1967 (hereinafter “UAPA”) were also mentioned.
4. The order on cognizance was passed on 29th July, 2020 wherein
cognizance was not taken of offences punishable under UAPA. However, the
ld. Special Judge (NIA)/ASJ-03, New Delhi District, had taken cognizance of
the offences publishable under IPC and Arms Act. The relevant portion is
extracted below:
“52. I accordingly find that NIA has failed to bring
any evidence before the court for the offences under
UA(P) Act and hence, the court cannot take
cognizance of the offences punishable u/s 18, 19, 23,
38 and 39 UAP Act.
[…]
54. Further, I find that in view of the testimonies of
witnesses cited from sl. no. 3 to 13 in the list of
witnesses and the seizure of the arms and
ammunition xxx by Spl. Cell. Delhi Police, there is
sufficient material before the court for taking
cognizance for the offense punishable u/s 120B,
153A, 186, 353, 307 and 34 IPC and offences
punishable u/s 25 (1B)(a) and 27(1) Arms Act. I
accordingly take cognizance of these offenses.”
5. After passing of this order, the trial took place before the ld. Additional
Sessions Judge. At the relevant point in time, the concerned ASJ was also
notified as the Special Judge, for the Special Court under the NIA Act as well.
CRL.A. 6/2026 Page 2 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2026 at 20:53:19
6. The Court has finally convicted the Appellant under Section 307, 186,
253, IPC and 25/27 of the Arms Act and has awarded the sentence as under:
“4. Insofar as the impugned order on sentence
is concerned, the Appellant has been convicted for
seven years rigorous imprisonment in the following
terms:
Accused Section
Period of Fine
Imprisonment
Khaja Moideen 307 IPC 07 years RI Rs. 7500/-
@ Khaja 186 IPC 03 months SI Nil
Mohideen @ 353 IPC 02 months SI Nil
Khwaja 25/27 Arms Act 05 months SI Nil
Moideen @
Jalal @ Kasim
Khan
Syed Ali Niwas 307 IPC 07 years RI Rs. 7500/-
@ Faheem 186 IPC 03 months SI Nil
Khan @ Siraj 353 IPC 02 months SI Nil
25/27 Arms Act 05 months SI Nil
7. Today, Mr. Rahul Tyagi, ld. SPP for the NIA has, at the outset, raised
an objection to the maintainability of the present petition before a Division
Bench. It is submitted that since the impugned judgement and order on
sentence have been passed by ld. Additional Sessions Judge-03, Patiala House
Courts, New Delhi, the appeal in respect of the concerned offences under IPC
and Arms Act would lie before the ld. Single Judge of this Court. This is
especially so, as per the ld. SSP, since the Appellant has not been tried for any
offences under the UAPA.
8. In support of his submissions, Mr. Tyagi, ld. SSP has relied on the
notification dated 26th September, 2019 issued by the CTCR Division,
Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, as per which the AdditionalCRL.A. 6/2026 Page 3 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2026 at 20:53:19
Sessions Judge-03, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, was also notified as the
Additional Judge to the NIA Special Court for the purpose of Section 11 (1)
of the NIA Act. The relevant portion of the notification dated 26th September,
2019 reads as under:
“S.O. 3542(E). In exercise of the powers conferred
by section 11 of the National Investigation Agency
Act, 2008 (34 of 2008), the Central Government in
supersession of the notification of the Government
of India, published in the Gazette of India,
Extraordinary, Part-II, Section 3, Sub-section (ii),
vide number S.O. 3093 (E), dated the 22nd
September, 2017 and S.O. 5393 (E), dated the 25th
October, 2018, except as respects things done or
omitted to be done before such supersession, the
Central Government in consultation with the
Hon’ble Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi
hereby designates the Court of Additional Sessions
Judge-03, New Delhi District, Patiala House
Courts, New Delhi as the Additional Judge to the
NIA Special Court for the purpose of the sub-
section (1) of section 11 of the above said Act for
the trial of Scheduled Offences investigated by the
National Investigation Agency.
The jurisdiction of the Special Court mentioned
above shall extend throughout the National Capital
Territory of Delhi.”
9. It is submitted by ld. SPP that since the impugned judgment has been
passed not as a Special NIA Judge but as the Additional Sessions Judge, the
appeal would lie before the ld. Single Judge.
10. Mr. Mobin Akhtar, ld. Counsel for the Appellant in response submits
that after the order on cognizance dated 29th July, 2020, there is no specific
CRL.A. 6/2026 Page 4 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2026 at 20:53:19
order which has been passed by the ld. Special Judge transferring the matter
from the Special NIA Court to the regular Sessions Court. It is his case that
though the same officer may be holding both the positions of Special Judge
and Additional Session Judge, the order transferring the case in terms of
Section 20 of the NIA Act was required. In the absence of the same, the appeal
would lie before the Division Bench only.
11. The Court has heard the parties and perused the record. The notification
dated 26th September, 2019 is clear to the effect that the ld. ASJ-03, New
Delhi District, Patiala House Courts has been designated as an Additional
Judge, NIA Special Court. Thus, ld. ASJ-03 has been conferred jurisdiction
in respect of offences triable by both a Sessions Court and the Special Court
under the NIA Act.
12. In this context, the order on cognizance was passed by the concerned
ld. ASJ-03, exercising jurisdiction of the Special Court, NIA. However, in the
said order, the ld. ASJ-03 has categorically declined to take cognizance of
offences punishable under UAPA, while taking cognizance of offences
punishable under IPC and Arms Act.
13. Considering the same, the mere allegation of non-passing of the
procedural order under Section 20 of NIA Act would not render the impugned
judgment as a judgment passed by the Special Court under the NIA Act. It has
to be treated as a judgment passed by the regular Sessions Judge.
14. Accordingly, since the Appellant has been sentenced to maximum for
seven years of rigorous imprisonment, the appeal against the impugned
judgement of conviction and order on sentence would lie before the ld. Single
Judge.
15. Subject to the orders of Hon’ble the Chief Justice, list before the ld.
CRL.A. 6/2026 Page 5 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2026 at 20:53:19
Single Judge as per Roster for consideration on 21st April, 2026.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
MADHU JAIN, J.
APRIL 7, 2026/ys/msh
CRL.A. 6/2026 Page 6 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2026 at 20:53:19
