{"id":256389,"date":"2021-10-30T10:00:31","date_gmt":"2021-10-30T04:30:31","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=256389"},"modified":"2021-10-29T16:10:34","modified_gmt":"2021-10-29T10:40:34","slug":"investigation-into-origins-and-transmission-of-covid-19-virus","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/30\/investigation-into-origins-and-transmission-of-covid-19-virus\/","title":{"rendered":"Investigation into origins and transmission of Covid-19 virus: Del Court dismisses application seeking registration of FIR, investigation by NIA"},"content":{"rendered":"

Patiala House Courts, New Delhi: <\/strong>Parveen Singh, Additional Sessions Judge expressed that,<\/p>\n

\u201cSection 6(3) NIA Act only applies to the cases where a report has been sent by the State Government and does not apply to the cases where information has been given by some individual and thus, Central Government is not bound to act upon this information within 15 days or to revert back to said individual.\u201d<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Instant application was filed under Section 156 (3) CrPC read with Section 16 of NIA Act seeking directions for registration of First Information Report.<\/p>\n

Applicant\/Complainant was renowned in the field of medicine with recognized expertise and in the said capacity he undertook a thorough analysis of nature and origin of SARS-CoV-2.<\/p>\n

He submitted that in view of the nefarious, terrorist, expansionist, aggressive and animus behaviour of China at the borders of Northeast region of India, it would be dangerous not to undertake a detailed investigation qua the origin and spread of the virus from China to India. Considering the nature of deliberate and malicious origin of the virus, offences under Sections 16, 17, 18, 18A, 18B, 23 etc. of UAPA and section 14 of Weapons of Mass Destruction and their Delivery System (Prohibition of Unlawful Activities) Act and Sections 121\/270\/302\/307\/312\/313\/325\/333\/314 r\/w Sections 34\/120B of IPC are made out.<\/p>\n

In view of the above-stated applicant forwarded a complaint to the Director General, NIA for registration of appropriate report and for investigation into the offences. Applicant forwarded a complaint to the MHA.<\/p>\n

Complainant\u2019s counsel submitted that it was a widespread conspiracy to carry out the terrorist act by a biological weapon throughout the world and it had its effects in India also.<\/p>\n

Adding to the above contention, he added that as per Section 15 (1) (a) of UAPA, 1967, an act committed by using substances whether biological radioactive, nuclear of a hazardous nature or by any other means to cause death, injury to any person or persons is a terrorist act. He has further contended that the virus created in the lab was a biological substance which has resulted in loss of lives and thus a terrorist act has been committed. He has further contended that as per Section 16 (1) of NIA Act, 2008, this court has powers to take cognizance of the offence and thus, it becomes a court of original jurisdiction and hence, the present application under Section 156 (3) CrPC is maintainable before this court.<\/p>\n

Analysis, Law and Decision<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Bench stated that a bare perusal of Section 6 of the NIA Act reflected that there are two modes of investigation by NIA.<\/p>\n