Back
2024 Supreme(Bom) 598
IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya, CJ., Sarang V. Kotwal, J.
Dr. Hema Suresh Ahuja & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 911 of 2019
Decided On : 13-03-2024
Mr. Vaibhav Salvi, Advocate a/w. Mr. Ashwet Bhoir i/b. Mr. Shailesh Kharat for the Appellants.; Dr. Birendra Saraf, Advocate General i/b. Mr. H.S. Venegaokar, Public Prosecutor a/w. Mr. S.V. Gavand, APP for the Respondent-State., Mr. Devang Vyas, Additional Solicitor General, a/w. Mr. D.P. Singh and Mr. Sheelang Shah for the Respondent - Union of India., Mr. Mayur Khandeparkar, Amicus Curiae a/w. Mr. Vikramjit Garewal and Ms. Aneesa Cheema, Mr. Amit Arvind Katarnaware, Advocate a/w. Mr. Aditya Arvind Katarnaware for the Respondent No.2 / Victim., Mr. Alankar Kirpekar, Advocate a/w. Mr. Susmit Phatale, Mr. Ashish Ingle, Mr. Ayush Tiwari, Mr. Somnath Kale and Mr. Nikhil Adkine i/b. Susmit Sanjay Phatale for Intervener.
IMPORTANT POINT
[The court established that Section 15A(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act mandates video recording of all proceedings related to offences under the Act, including bail hearings, to protect the rights of victims and witnesses.]
Headnote:
VIDEO RECORDING - SCHEDULED CASTES AND SCHEDULED TRIBES (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) ACT - 15A(10), 14A, 2(i) of CrPC - The court interpreted Section 15A(10) of the Atrocities Act as mandating video recording of all proceedings related to offences under the Act, including bail applications. The court emphasized the importance of protecting the rights of victims and witnesses, and concluded that the term 'proceedings' encompasses judicial proceedings as defined in the CrPC. The court also ruled that the absence of specific rules does not hinder the implementation of this provision.
JUDGMENT
Sarang V. Kotwal, J. - This matter is placed before us to answer the reference made by a Single Judge Bench of this Court (Coram: Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav, J.) in Criminal Appeal No.911/2019 vide the order dated 9.8.2019. Following are the issues referred for our decision:
(1) Whether proceeding under 15A(10) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 would amount to a judicial proceeding as contemplated under section 2(i) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ?
(2) Whether it would be necessary to video record any proceeding relating to the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989, especially when the proceedings are held in open court, as contemplated under section 327 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and what would be the objective to be achieved ?
(3) Whether hearing of a bail application under section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 is a judicial proceeding as contemplated under section 15A of the said Act ?
(4) Whether section 15A (10) of the said Act could be implemented in the absence of rules framed under the Act or formulation of a scheme for implementation ?
2. Before proceeding further, it is necessary to refer to the brief history as to why this reference was made.
3. This reference arose out of Criminal Appeal No.911/2019. It was an appeal under Section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Atrocities Act'). The Appellants in that Appeal were, in effect, asking for the relief of their release on bail in connection with C.R. No.157/2019 registered with Agripada police station, Mumbai on 23.5.2019 under Section 306 read with 34 of IPC, under Section 4 of the Maharashtra Prohibition of Ragging Act, under sections 3(1)(r),(s), (u), (za), (E) of the Atrocities Act and under Section 67 of the Information Technology Act. It is not necessary to refer to the facts and rival contentions on the merits of that Appeal. During the course of the hearing of that Appeal, an issue was raised by the original complainant that hearing of the Appeal should be video recorded in view of Section 15-A(10) of the Atrocities Act. For convenience, reference can be made to the said Section which reads thus :
'15-A Rights of victims and witnesses. -
xxxxx xxxxx xxxxx
(10) All proceedings relating to offences under this Act shall be video recorded.'
4. This question was considered by the learned Single Judge (Coram: Dama Sheshadri Naidu, J.) who was hearing that Appeal at that point of time. He passed a reasoned order dated 25.7.2019 and held that the proceedings ought to be video recorded. After considering the submissions made before him by both the sides, the learned Judge observed that he could not ignore the statutory mandate even if it may cause delay in deciding those proceedings. Section 15-A is concerned with the rights of the victims and the witnesses and if the demand for video recording came either from the victim or from the witness, the provision assumes greater importance. He further observed that the expression 'proceedings in relation to' is important. Chapter II of the Atrocities Act comprises Sections 3 to 9. They deal with the punishments for offences of atrocities, punishment for neglect of duties, enhanced punishment for subsequent conviction, application of certain provisions of the Indian Penal Code, forfeiture of property of certain persons, the presumption as to offences, and conferment of powers. All these proceedings relate to the offences under the Atrocities Act and they came within the provisions of sub-section (10) of Section 15-A of the Atrocities Act. He further held that the bail proceedings are the proceedings in relation to offences under Chapter II and, by extension, under the Atrocities Act. According to him, it did not lie in the province of the Court to question the legislative wisdom, much less, l
