Summary
The Court held that the 2002 and 2014 SEBI amendments changed the forum for trial of earlier offences as well as pending prosecutions. The statutory language displaced the Magistrate’s jurisdiction in favour of the Sessions Court and subsequently the Special Court. It affirmed the Delhi High Court’s conclusion and set aside the contrary Bombay High Court judgment. This headnote is confined to the forum and revision conclusions.
Issues
- Whether the amended trial forum applied to earlier offences and already commenced proceedings.
- Whether the asserted loss of revision prevented application of the forum amendment.
Held
- Procedural amendments and changes of trial forum generally operate retrospectively, subject to legislative intent. Pending proceedings require attention to any vested position, but the specific SEBI amendments clearly expressed a contrary intention and transferred even commenced trials to the new forum. (¶ 34–41)
- The 2002 wording excluding courts inferior to a Sessions Court denuded the former Magistrate forum of jurisdiction. Section 26B introduced by the 2014 amendment expressly covered offences committed before or after commencement and required Special Court trial. (¶¶ 39–41, 56)
- Revisional jurisdiction did not create a corresponding vested right in a litigant. The claimed deprivation of revision therefore did not invalidate the transfer to the amended forum. (¶ 54–55)
Result
Matters disposed of: Delhi High Court conclusion affirmed for the stated reasons; contrary Bombay High Court judgment set aside. Earlier-offence and pending trials assigned to the amended statutory forum.