2018 Supreme(All) 1007

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
(Full Bench)
BEFORE : DILIP B. BHOSALE, C.J., RAMESH SINHA AND YASHWANT VARMA, JJ.
IN RE : PROVISION OF SECTION 14A OF SC/ST (PREVENTION OF ATROCITIES) AMENDMENT ACT, 2015 ....Petitoner
Versus
NIL ....Respondent
WITH
SATYENDRA AND ANOTHER ....Applicant
Versus
STATE OF U.P. ....Opposite Party
WITH
VISHNU BEHARI TIWARI ....Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(Public Interest Litigation No. 8 of 2018, Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 38755 of 2017 and Criminal Writ Public Interest Litigation No. 11 of 2018, decided on 10th October, 2018)

Headnote:(A) Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 – Section 14A(3) second proviso – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 439 – Constitution of India – Article 14 and 21 – Limitation – Period of 90 days from date of order, further provision for condonation of delay by High Court in appeals preferred beyond period of 90 days and again providing a maximum period of 180 days after which no appeal shall be entertained – Validity – Second proviso to Section 14A (3) has direct and unhindered effect of taking away salutary right of first appeal which has been recognised to be an integral facet of fair procedure enshrined in Article 21 of Constitution – Hence Second proviso to Section 14A (3) is violative of both Articles 14 and 21 of Constitution – Absence of discretion in Court to consider condonation of delay even where sufficient cause may exist renders measure wholly irrational and excessive – Second proviso to Section 14A (3) of Act, 2015 struck down. [Para 112]

       (B) Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 – Section 14A – Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 226 and 227 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Sections 397, 482 – Power – High Court – Under Articles 226/227of Constitution or its revisional or powers under Section 482 – Constitutional and inherent powers of High Court not ‘ousted’ by Section 14A of Act, 2015 however they cannot be invoked in cases and situations where an appeal would lie under Section 14A – Further in view of word ‘order’ as occurring in sub-section( 1) of Section 14A would also include intermediate orders provisions of Section 397Cr.P.C. impliedly excluded by virtue of special provisions made in Section 14A. [Para 112]

       (C) Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 – Section 14A – Applicability of amended provisions of Section 14A to offences or proceedings initiated or pending prior to commencement of Act, 2015 – Held, provisions of Section 14A would be applicable to all judgments, sentences or orders as well as orders granting or refusing bail passed or pronounced after commencement of Act, 2015 – However introduction of this provision would not affect proceedings instituted or pending before High Court provided they relate to a judgment, sentence or order passed prior to commence of Act, 2015 – Further applicability of Section 14A will not depend upon date of commission of offence – Determinative factor would be date of order of Special Court or Exclusive Court. [Para 113]

       (D) Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 – Section 14A (3) second proviso – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 439 – Limitation for filing of appeal as specified in second proviso to Section 14A (3) of Act, 2015 – Upon expiry of aforesaid period of limitation powers of High Court under purview of Section 439 Cr.P.C. – Held, provisions of Section 439 Cr.P.C. would not remain in suspension during period of 180 days and thereafter will not revive on its expiry. [Para 113]

       (E) Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 – Section 14 – Jurisdiction – Powers of existing Special Courts to directly take cognizance of offences under Act, 1989 – Existing Special Courts will not have jurisdiction to directly take cognizance of offences under 1989 Act – This power stands conferred only upon Exclusive Special Courts to be established or Special Courts to be specified in terms of substituted Section 14 – However substitution of Section 14 by Amending Act will not have effect of denuding existing Special Courts of authority to exercise jurisdiction in respect of proceedings under 1989 Act – Fact that cognizance has been taken by existing Special Courts directly in view of uncertainty which prevailed, would not ipso facto render proceedings void ab initio – Ultimately it would be for objector to establish serious prejudice or a miscarriage of justice. [Para 114]