IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bechu Kurian Thomas, J.
Renoj R.S - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Kerala Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala - Respondent
Bail Appl. No. 6688 OF 2022
Decided On : 26-10-2022
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Section 14A, 20 - Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 - Section 42A, 31 - Granting bail - Act not in derogation of any other law - Act to override other laws - Application of Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 to proceedings before a Special Court - When Court peruse provisions of section 42A of POCSO Act, it is evident that said statute clearly indicates that provisions of POCSO Act will prevail over all other laws in event of any inconsistency. (Para 15).
Findings of the Court: Court hold that whenever an offence under POCSO Act is alleged, along with provisions of SC/ST Act, accused is entitled to take recourse to procedure contemplated under POCSO Act for bail. Since by virtue of section 31 of POCSO Act, provisions of Cr.P.C are made applicable, petitioner is perfectly justified in approaching this Court under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Result: Bail application allowed.
ORDER :
By an order dated 02.09.2022, this Court had granted bail to the petitioner under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. However, since a legal question regarding conflict between two statutes arose, it was decided to consider the matter in detail. Hence, despite granting bail to the petitioner, the case was heard in detail on subsequent days.
2. The issue to be resolved relates to the manner and forum for filing an application for bail when offences under the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for brevity 'the POCSO Act') as well as the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the SC/ST Act') are both alleged to have been committed in the same crime.
3. The prosecution in the present case alleged that the defacto complainant/victim, aged just 15 years, was in a relationship with the first accused and on 16.07.2022, petitioner, who is the second accused, slapped the victim and scolded her using filthy language thereby committing offences under the Indian Penal Code,1860 apart from the POCSO Act. The prosecution also included provisions of the SC/ST Act since it was learnt that the victim was a member of the Scheduled Caste.
4. Petitioner was arrested on 19.07.2022 and was in custody till this Court directed his release. This bail application was filed on 12.08.2022. However, the Registry of this Court raised an objection that in view of the offences alleged under the SC/ST Act, an appeal alone is maintainable under section 14A of the said Act. Thereafter, the matter was placed for consideration of this Court and having regard to the urgency of the issue, especially since the petitioner was under detention, the Registry was directed to number the case. Subsequently, bail was granted to the petitioner, reserving the legal question to be decided later.
5. It is pertinent to mention at this juncture that this Court had, in a recent decision in Basheer v. Rajani (2022 (5) KLT 352) held that when an offence under the SC/ST Act is alleged, a bail application including that for anticipatory bail, can be filed only before the Special Court designated under the said statute. It was also held that the jurisdiction exercised by this Court in the matter of bail is only appellate in nature under section 14A of the SC/ST Act.
6. Sri. Sijo Pathaparambil Joseph, the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the objection raised by the Registry on the maintainability of this bail application is without any merit and also pointed out that the said objection resulted in the petitioner remaining in detention until 02-09-2022. After referring to various decisions, the learned Counsel submitted that the provisions of POCSO Act enable an accused even to seek anticipatory bail or bail by resorting to the provisions of the Cr. P.C since there is no restriction as in the SC/ST Act. The learned Counsel relied upon the principle that when two conflicting statutes contain non-obstante clauses, the later statute will prevail. The learned counsel also contended that since POCSO Act is the later of the two statutes, jurisdiction of this Court under Section 439 of Cr. P.C. can be invoked.
7. Sri. K.A Noushad, the learned Public Prosecutor, was also heard. The learned Public Prosecutor fairly submitted that the matter requires clarification to avoid confusion and recurrence in future of similar objections by the Registry.
8. While appreciating the legal issue raised, it is to be borne in mind that if the provisions of the POCSO Act prevail, then the petitioner is entitled to maintain an application for bail under section 439 of Cr.P.C and seek the remedy before the Sessions Court as well as the High Court. However, if the provisions of the SC/ST Act prevail, then an application for bail has to be filed before the Special Court and only an appeal will lie to the High Court under section 14A of the SC/ST Act. There is thus,
Solidaire India Ltd. v. Fairgrowth Financial Services Ltd. and Others
KSL and Industries Limited v. Arihant Threads Limited and Others (2008) 9 SCC 763
Statutory provision itself is clear in respect to law that will prevail whenever there is an inconsistency.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the summoning order passed by the Special Court under the POCSO Act may not be challenged by filing an appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST ....
The procedure under the POCSO Act prevails over the SC/ST Act when both offences are charged, and the jurisdiction of the Special Court under the POCSO Act applies in determining the bail plea when o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the overriding effect of the provisions of the POCSO Act on the provisions of the Atrocities Act in cases involving offences under both Acts, and t....
An accused under the SC/ST (POA) Act must follow statutory procedures for bail and cannot directly apply to the High Court after prior denials by the Special Court.
availability of the remedy of appeal under sub-section (2) of Section 14-A of the SC and ST Act, it will not be open for the High Court to exercise the original or concurrent jurisdiction under Secti....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.