The main legal point established in the judgment is that the accused's right to seek bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure revives after the expiry of the limited period provided by section 14-A of the SC/ST Act.

1. The instant appeal has been filed by the accused-appellant challenging the correctness of bail rejection order dated 25.06.2016 passed by Sri D.K. Tiwari, Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Tract Court No.2, Bulandshahr in case crime no.564 of 2016 (State Vs. Rohit) under sections 363, 366, 376 IPC, section 4 POCSO Act and section 3(2)5 of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes Act, 1989.

2. The memo of appeal has been presented in the office of the Court on 16.08.2017. The office of the Stamp Reporter has reported the filing of appeal beyond 357 days from its prescribed limitation. Along with the memo of appeal delay condonation application purported to be filed under section 5 of the Limitation Act has been moved, when it was inquired by the Court how the memo of appeal can be entertained after expiry of 180 days as per provisions contained in section 14-A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, newly inserted by Amending Act No.1 of 2016 which came into force with effect from 26.01.2016 vide S.O. 152(E) dated 18.01.2016. On this learned counsel for the appellant Sri Ajay Kumar, Advocate, has drawn attention of the Court to an order passed by a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 03.08.2017. For ready reference the order dated 3.8.2017 is quoted herein below:

"Counter affidavit on behalf of the complainant, filed today, is taken on record.

Learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P. raised a preliminary objection regarding maintainability of this bail application on the ground of availability of alternate remedy of filing appeal under the amended provisions of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

In view of the above, this application is rejected as not maintainable with liberty to the applicant to file appeal, as provided under the amended provisions of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

Certified copy of bail rejection order be returned to the learned counsel for the applicant after keeping a photocopy of the same on record."

3. On the basis of this order submission of Sri Ajai Kumar, Advocate, is that only remedy of filing appeal is available to the appellant and he can no more file an application for bail under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. The law is settled that the substantive rights of the parties would not be affected, during pendency of the litigation by an Act unless it had been given retrospective effect, expressly or by necessary implication. The Constitutional Bench of Hon'ble Apex Court in the celebrated case Garikapati Veeraya Vs. N. Subbiah Choudhry and others, AIR, 1957 SC 540 has also opined that relevant date for ascertaining substantive rights of the parties is the date of the commencement of the proceedings.

5. After recalling the legal position it would be gainful to have the factual matrix on the record.

6. On 2.5.2016 at 10.40 AM a check FIR was scribed at police station Kotwali Sahar, District Bulandshahr, registered as aforesaid case crime number, by private respondent, on that date informing the police of police station concerned that his grand-daughter aged 16 years was subjected to sexual exploitation by the accused-appellant on the strength of compromise to marry. On 23.3.2016 accused appellant took his grand daughter from the house, subjected her to rape and refused to marry her on the pretext of difference of caste.

7. It is clear that in the present matter proceedings commenced on 2.5.2016 when the private respondent informed the concerned police about the commission of the crime and check FIR was scribed, there is no dispute that on or after 26.01.2016 in such matters courts have to follow the procedure prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure and wherever the Special Act contains provisions inconsistent with the Code of Criminal Procedure then by virtue of section 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, procedure prescribed in the special law has to be followed.

8. The complici