Orders Appealable U/S 14A Of SC/ST Act Can't Be Challenged U/S 482 Of CrPC: Allahabad High Court
The Allahabad High Court recently observed that in cases where an appeal against an order would lie under Section 14A of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the aggrieved person cannot invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC to challenge the order. A bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed thus while relying upon a full bench judgment...
The Allahabad High Court recently observed that in cases where an appeal against an order would lie under Section 14A of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the aggrieved person cannot invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC to challenge the order.
A bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi observed thus while relying upon a full bench judgment of the High Court in the case of Ghulam Rasool Khan and others v. State of U.P. and others wherein it was held that an aggrieved person, having a remedy of appeal under Section 14A of the 1989 Act, cannot be allowed to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 CrPC.
The Court also noted that Section 14-A starts with the words “notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974)” and that in In Re : Provision of Section 14 (a) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, another full bench of the HC has held that “while the constitutional and inherent powers of this Court are not “ousted” by Section 14A, they cannot be invoked in cases and situations where an appeal would lie under Section 14A”.
The single Judge also noted observed that although the question – as to whether an aggrieved person who has not availed of the remedy of an appeal under the provisions of Section 14 A of 1989 can be allowed to approach the HC by preferring an application under the provisions of S. 482 CrPC? – has been referred to a larger Bench of the HC in 2023, but the decision in Ghulam Rasool Khan (Supra) will hold good till a decision is taken by a larger Bench.
Against this backdrop, the Court concluded that the inherent powers of the HC under Section 482 CrPC cannot be invoked in cases and situations where an appeal would lie under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act and hence, the aggrieved person having the remedy of appeal under Section 14A of the 1989 Act, cannot be allowed to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 CrPC.
The bench made these observations while dismissing an application filed under Section 482 CrPC challenging the entire proceedings of a case against the applicant registered under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307 IPC & Section 3 (2) 5 of SC/ST Act pending in the Court of Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Lucknow.
High Court's recent reference to the larger bench
As mentioned above, a single judge of the HC, in September 2023, referred to a larger question - whether an application, filed under Section 482 of CrPC, challenging entire proceedings of a case under the SC/ST Act, is maintainable.
A bench of Justice JJ Munir referred the issue in question as it noted that there were conflicting judgments of the High Court regarding the maintainability of such an application moved under Section 482 CrPC.
The court noted that the opinion of a Single Judge of the HC in Anuj Kumar @ Sanjay and Others vs. State Of UP and Others 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 264 was in conflict with the opinion of another Single Judge in Devendra Yadav And 7 Others vs. State of UP 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 135
For context, in Anuj Kumar's case (Supra), it was held that an Application U/s 482 CrPC can't be filed against a summoning order passed by a Special Judge in an SC/ST Act Offence.
It was further held therein that where the accused seeks quashing of the proceedings of the case/charge sheet together with the summoning and the cognizance order, the remedy is by way of an appeal under Section 14-A (1) of the SC/ ST Act
On the other hand, in the Devendra Yadav case (supra), it was held that an order issuing a summons to an accused for an offence under the SC/ST Act can be challenged by way of filing an application under Section 482 CrPC.
The bench of Justice Rahul Chaturvedi held so while referring to the Apex Court's ruling in the cases of Ramawatar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh LL 2021 SC 589 and B Venkateswaran vs P Bakthavatchalam 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 14 wherein the Top Court had held that criminal proceedings arising out of SC/ST Act can be quashed invoking powers under Section 482 of CrPC.
Appearances
Counsel for Applicant: Trideep Narayan Pandey, Deepanker Kumar, Priya Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party: G.A., GK Dikshit, Gopal Krishna Dixit
Case title - Shivam Kashyap vs. State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Affairs Lko. And Another 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 90 [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12798 of 2023]
Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 90