Additional Sessions Judge Pawan Kumar Jain framed charges against Ghandy and directed a magistrate to begin the trial in the case from March 31.
The court said there was sufficient material on record to make out a prima facie case against Ghandy and co-accused Arvind Joshi for cheating, forgery and impersonation
The court rejected the police plea to prosecute Ghandy under the stringent Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) after taking note that there was no proper sanction for it.
“There is sufficient material on record to make out a prima-facie case for the offence punishable under Section 20 and 38 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act against Kobad Ghandy. But since, the cognizance order dated Feb 19, 2010 qua the offences punishable under the UAPA was not in accordance with the mandatory provisions… I hereby discharge accused Kobad Ghandy for the offences punishable under Sections 10/13/18/20/38 of the UAPA,” said Judge Jain.
While sending the case to a magistrate, the court said that since cheating and impersonation charges, among others, were exclusively triable by a metropolitan magistrate the “file be sent back to the court of chief metropolitan magistrate with direction either to retain the file with him or assign the case to some other competent court”.
Police March 23 filed fresh sets of charges against Ghandy before Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Vinod Yadav and placed fresh sanction to prosecute him.
The charge sheet contained the order of additional secretary (home) against Ghandy and Joshi.
Police alleged that Ghandy, an alumnus of the prestigious Doon School, along with his associates, was trying to build a Maoist cell in the national capital.