ORDER :

RAJESH BINDAL, CJ.

1. On a reference made by the learned Single Judge vide order dated August 3, 2018 to a larger Bench and constitution thereof by Hon’ble the Chief Justice, on administrative side, for consideration of the following questions, the matter has been placed before us :

(i) Whether a Single Judge of this Court while deciding Criminal Appeal (Defective) No. 523/2017 In re : Rohit Vs. State of U.P. and another vide judgment dated 29.08.2017 correctly permitted the conversion of appeal under Section 14 A of the Act, 1989 into a bail application by exercising the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.?

(ii) Whether keeping in view the judgment of Rohit (supra), an aggrieved person will have two remedies available of preferring an appeal under the provisions of Section 14 A of the Act, 1989 as well as a bail application under the provisions of Section 439 of the Cr.P.C.?

(iii) Whether an aggrieved person who has not availed of the remedy of an appeal under the provisions of Section 14 A of Act, 1989 can be allowed to approach the High Court by preferring an application under the provisions of Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.?

(iv) What would be the remedy available to an aggrieved person who has failed to avail the remedy of appeal under the provision of Act, 1989 and the time period for availing the said remedy has also lapsed?

2. It is a case in which the appellants had filed an appeal under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989[1989 Act] challenging the order dated September 14, 2017 vide which the learned Court below had taken cognizance of the matter and the appellants had been summoned to face trial. The order dated April 12, 2018, vide which bailable warrants had been issued against the appellants, was also challenged.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants while referring to an order passed by a Single Bench of this Court in Criminal Appeal Defective No. 523 of 2017 titled as Rohit Vs State of U.P. and another, (2017) 6 ALJ 754 submitted that an appeal filed after expiry of period of limitation provided under Section 14A of the 1989 Act, can be converted into a bail application in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. As in the case in hand, the appeal was filed beyond 180 days, the same should be permitted to be converted into bail application and dealt with accordingly.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that primarily all the questions, which have been referred to be considered by Full Bench of this Court, have been answered by a Full Bench of this Court in In Re : Provision of Section 14 (a) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015[(2018) 6 ALJ 631]. He further submitted that Section 14A (3) of the 1989 Act, which provides period of limitation for filing an appeal and limited discretion in case of delay, has been struck down. Meaning thereby, an appeal against an order passed by the Court below under the provisions of the 1989 Act, can be filed at any time. The judgment in Rohit’s case (supra), as relied by learned counsel for the appellants, has specifically been overruled. This Court cannot rewrite the provisions of law, the same have to be interpreted as such.

5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book.

6. To appreciate the arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties with reference to interpretation of Section 14A of the 1989 Act, it would be appropriate to reproduce the aforesaid Section hereunder :

“14A. Appeals.-(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie, from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court or an Exclusive Special Court, to the High Court both on facts and on law.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in subsection (3) of section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie to the Hig