IMPORTANT POINT
The Special Court under the SC/ST Act can try IPC offences, and bail applications are maintainable under Cr.P.C. when not charged under SC/ST Act.

JUDGMENT :

Pankaj Bhatia, J.

1. Heard Sri Prashant Shukla and Sri Prateek Tiwari, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant Chandra Raj @ Chandra and Sri Vivek Gupta holding brief of Sri Arshad Siddiqui, learned Counsel for the complainant. Sri Anuj Dayal, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the accused applicants Isha and Shanti as well as Sri Abhinav Srivastava, learned Counsel for the complainant. Sri Nikhil Singh, learned AGA-I for the State in both the cases.

2. As common issues and objections have been raised in the abovesaid bail applications, I intend to decide both the applications by means of this common order.

3. For the sake of brevity, the facts in brief as emerge from Bail Application No.8192 of 2024 are that an FIR No. 300 of 2024, under Sections 328, 376-D, 506 IPC read with Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act at Police Station Bachhrawan, District Raebareli was lodged against all the accused named in the FIR including the applicant. Subsequently, a charge-sheet was filed, in which, the applicant was charged for an offence under Sections 328, 376D, 506 IPC only and was not charged under Section 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act. The applicant, Chandra Raj preferred a bail application, which came to be dismissed by the Special Court constituted under the provisions of The Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (In short “SC/ST Act”) vide order dated 05.06.2024, against which, the present bail application before this Court under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. has been filed. In Bail Application No.8751 of 2024, the FIR No.233 of 2024, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 307, 302, 504, 506, 34 IPC at Police Station Raunahi, District Ayodhya. Subsequently, it appears that sections of SC/ST Act was also added, however, as against the applicants, Isha and Shanti only charges under IPC was framed and not under SC/ST Act. The applicants filed a bail applications before the Special Court seeking bail under the sections of IPC, which came to be rejected vide orders dated 25.07.2024 and 19.07.2024 by the same Special Court, against which, the Bail Application No.8751 of 2024 has been filed under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. seeking enlargement on bail.

4. While arguing the bail applications filed under Sections 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (In short “Cr.P.C.”) read with Section 483 of The Bharatiya Nyaya Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, it is argued by the Counsel for the applicants that on the facts of the case, the applicants have not been charged under the SC/ST Act and have been charged only for the offences under India Penal Code (IPC), as such, the bail application can be heard and decided by this Court.

5. A preliminary objection was raised by the Counsel for the informant and the learned A.G.A. that in terms of the mandate of Section 14-A(2) of the SC/ST Act, the present bail application is not maintainable under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. and the applicants, if so desire, can avail the specific remedy of appeal prescribed under Section 14-A(2) of the said Act. The said preliminary objections are advanced in both the cases by the learned Counsel for the complainants and learned A.G.A.

6. Sri Prashant Shukla, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, Chandra Raj @ Chandra argues that in view of the specific judgment on this point in case of Pramod vs State of Uttar Pradesh (Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.2447 of 2024), this exact objections were considered by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court and the bail application was held to be maintainable under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. mainly on the ground that in the criminal cases, in which the accused are not charge-sheeted under SC/ST Act are liable to be processed under the provisions of Cr.P.C. even if the offences are being tried by the Special Court established under the SC/ST Act and the Court proceeded to decide the bail application, vide order dated 01.03.2024. In the light of the said, it is proposed to be argued that the bail application is mainta