An appeal lies from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court to the High Court both on facts and on law under Section 21 of the N.I.A. Act, 2008.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Murli Manohar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant as well as Ms. Shikha Sinha, learned counsel for the National Investigating Agency.

2. These proceedings have come up before this Division Bench in view of an order dated 16.11.2017, passed by learned Single Judge in proceedings Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. bearing No.7514 of 2017; Hussna Vs. N.I.A. through Home Secretary-I and another, which was registered at the behest of the appellant. The said order reads as under:-

"The instant application has been moved on behalf of accused/applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying for quashing of order dated 06.10.2017 passed by Special Judge N.I.A., Lucknow allowing the application of N.I.A. for taking voice sample of the accused/applicant in Session Trial No.157 of 2015 (State Vs. Hussna & Ors.) Police Station Kotwali City, District Bijnore.

On behalf of N.I.A. objection has been made on the strength of provisions contained in Section 21 of the N.I.A. Act, 2008 which is quoted herein below:-

1. Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, an appeal shall lie from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court to the High Court both on facts and on law.

2. Every appeal under sub-section (1) shall be heard by a Bench of two Judges of the High Court and shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal.

3. Except as aforesaid, no appeal or revision shall lie to any court from any judgment, sentence or order including an interlocutory order of a Special Court.

4. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3) of section 378 of the Code, an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of the Special Court granting or refusing bail.

5. Every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of thirty days from the date of the judgment, sentence or order appealed from: Provided that the High Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of thirty days: Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of period of ninety days.

On behalf of the applicant it is submitted that the order is neither appealable nor revisable. It is out of the ambit of sub section 1 of section 21 of N.I.A. Act.

On behalf of N.I.A. learned counsel Ms. Shikha Sinha has drawn attention to sub section 3 which prescribes that except as provided in sub section 1 no appeal or revision shall lie to any court from any judgment, sentence or order including interlocutory order.

On behalf of applicant it has been submitted that interlocutory orders passed by Special Judge N.I.A. can be challenged by way of petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The contention raised before me relates to the maintainability of application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order passed by Special Judge N.I.A. Prima-facie, such matter can be decided under the provisions of the Special Act i.e. N.I.A. Act, 2008 and a special forum has been provided under sub section 2 for the purpose. To judge the maintainability of any petition to be out of the mischief of section 21 requires to be decided by the special forum provided by section 21 of the said Act.

Therefore, it is directed that put up the present matter before the appropriate court in the next week, if possible."

3. The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant before us challenged an order dated 6.10.2017, passed by Special Judge, N.I.A. Lucknow allowing the application of National Investigating Agency for taking voice sample of the accused/appellant during pendency of Session Trial No.157 of 2015; State Vs. Hussna and others, related to Police Station Kotwali City District Bijnore as asserted by the appellant. Another order dated 24.04.2015, by which the Union of India had directed the N.I.A. to take up the