The Supreme Court of India has ruled that the Aircraft Act, 1934, is a comprehensive legal framework governing the safety and security of civil aviation and aerodromes. In a landmark judgment, the court clarified the limited role of state police in cases involving airport violations. The bench, comprising Justices A.S. Oka and Manmohan, issued the ruling while dismissing an appeal by the Jharkhand government.
Background of the Case
The Jharkhand government had appealed against the High Court’s decision to quash an FIR against BJP MPs Nishikant Dubey and Manoj Tiwari. The case stemmed from allegations that the MPs forced the Deoghar Air Traffic Control (ATC) to allow their chartered flight to take off after sunset on August 31, 2022, violating airport security protocols.
The FIR was lodged at Kunda police station, Deoghar, accusing the MPs and others of pressuring ATC personnel. The flight reportedly took off at 6:17 PM, 14 minutes after sunset, breaching scheduled operating hours.
Supreme Court’s Observations
The bench noted the following:
Aircraft Act as a Complete Code:
The Act and the rules framed under it provide a comprehensive procedure for handling offences related to aviation safety.
Complaints under the Aircraft Act can only be filed by an authorised officer or with prior sanction from aviation authorities.
Role of State Police:
State police can only forward their investigation materials to the authorised officer.
The decision to file a complaint lies solely with the authorised officer under the Aircraft Act.
Judicial Oversight:
The High Court acted within its rights to quash the FIR, as it lacked the prior sanction required under Section 12B of the Act and the Aircraft (Amendment) Act, 2020.
No Evidence of Criminal Offence:
The court found no evidence to support claims of rash or negligent acts endangering lives under Section 336 IPC.
Allegations of criminal trespass (Section 447 IPC) and house trespass (Section 448 IPC) were also dismissed, as the MPs neither forcibly entered nor acted with intimidation or annoyance.
Decision and Next Steps
The Supreme Court dismissed the state government’s appeal but granted them four weeks to forward the investigation materials to the authorised officer under the Aircraft Act. The officer will then decide whether to file a formal complaint.
Broader Implications
This judgment affirms the primacy of the Aircraft Act in matters related to aviation-related offenses and curtails the state police’s involvement only to the procedural level. This judgment also ensures that the judiciary will not misuse the legal process and will rather support the implementation of the aviation law.
The Supreme Court’s verdict is expected to set a precedent for handling airport security violations, ensuring that such cases are addressed within the framework of the Aircraft Act. The ruling also brings clarity to the jurisdictional boundaries between aviation authorities and state police.