Even Appeal For Registering FIR Under SC/ST Act Will Have To Be Video Recorded: Bombay High Court
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court recently held that even the proceedings in an appeal seeking to register a First Information Report (FIR) under the stringent Scheduled Caste Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC ST), will be needed to be "video-recorded."Single-judge Justice Sandeep Marne while hearing a plea filed by one Vijay Sapkale, who sought to register an...
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court recently held that even the proceedings in an appeal seeking to register a First Information Report (FIR) under the stringent Scheduled Caste Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (SC ST), will be needed to be "video-recorded."
Single-judge Justice Sandeep Marne while hearing a plea filed by one Vijay Sapkale, who sought to register an FIR against some private persons, while in an appeal, sought to video-record the proceedings.
In his September 3 order, Justice Marne noted that a division bench of the Bombay High Court has in the case of Dr Hema Ahuja vs State of Maharashtra, already held that any proceedings arising from the SC ST Act, will have to be video-recorded.
"Since the Division Bench of this Court has held that 'any proceeding' relating to the SC & ST Act need to be video recorded, in my view, even a proceeding seeking registration of FIR would be covered by the expression 'any proceeding' used by Division Bench in the judgment in Dr. Hema Suresh Ahuja (supra)," the judge said.
In that view of the matter, it would be appropriate to direct video recording hearing of the Criminal Appeal considering the ratio laid down by Division Bench of this Court in Dr. Hema Suresh Ahuja (supra), the bench observed.
"Therefore, Interim Application is accordingly allowed. The proceeding in the instant appeal are directed to be video recorded as provided under section 15-A(10) of the SC & ST Act," the judge ordered. The judge agreed with the applicant in this appeal, who argued that since a precedent has been set in Dr Hema Ahuja case, the present proceedings too need to be video recorded. However, the proposed accused in the case, argued that since an FIR under the provisions of the SC ST Act is yet to be filed, the provisions of the Act would not apply on the instant plea, which would mean that the proceedings therefore, need not be video recorded.
Appearance:
Advocates Altaf Khan, Akash Mangalgi and Mohan Chavan appeared for the Applicant.
Advocate Yugandhara Khanwilkar was appointed for the Proposed Accused.
Additional Public Prosecutor Shilpa Gajare-Dhumal represented the State.
Case Title: Vijay Sapkale vs Varsha Pradhan (Criminal Appeal 136 of 2021).