Orders Framing, Altering Or Refusing To Alter Charges Under NIA Act Are Interlocutory & Not Appealable: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently ruled that a Special Court's order framing charge or altering or refusing to alter the charge under the National Investigating Agency Act is an interlocutory order and not appealable under Section 21.

The pronouncement to this effect was made by a bench comprising Justices Sanjeev Kumar and Puneet Gupta while hearing of an appeal challenging an order of framing charge and the order refusing to alter the charge under NIA Act.

Contesting the plea at its threshold, the UT government raised a preliminary objection on the maintainability of the appeal. They argued that the order of framing charge or refusing to alter the charge is interlocutory in nature and, therefore, not appealable under Section 21.

The bench noted that Section 21 begins with a non-obstante clause, which means that any provision contained in CrPC that is not consistent with the provisions of Section 21 of the NIA Act will give way, and the provisions of Section 21 shall prevail and have an overriding effect.

The bench also noted that the Supreme Court in Sanjay Kumar Rai v. State of U.P, AIR 2021, held that the order framing a charge is an intermediate order falling between a final and interlocutory order, so far as CrPC is concerned. However, the term "interlocutory order" as used in Section 21 of the NIA Act cannot be given the same meaning as in CrPC, as the Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla v. State through C.B.I 1980 held that the term must be interpreted in a more restrictive sense in the context of Special enactments meant to ensure speedy case disposal, the High Court said.

The bench concluded that the interpretation of the term "interlocutory order" in Section 21 of the NIA Act must be in line with the more restrictive interpretation given in V.C. Shukla. Sub-Section (1) of Section 11 of the Special Courts Act is in pari materia with Sub-Section (1) of Section 21 of the NIA Act, and both sections deal with appellate jurisdiction over the Special Courts constituted under the two special legislations. Therefore, the interpretation of the term "interlocutory order" in Section 11(1) of the Special Courts Act in V.C. Shukla applies to the term "interlocutory order" in Sub-Section (1) of Section 21 of the NIA Act, the court underscored.

Elaborating on the mandate behind the enactment of NIA Act the bench observed that the provisions of the NIA Act must be interpreted in such a way that it achieves the object of the legislature and eliminates all possible means and loopholes that may be exploited by an interested party to adopt dilatory tactics.

Thus, the bench held that the order framing charge or an order altering or refusing to alter the charge passed by the Special Court under the NIA Act is an interlocutory order not appealable under Section 21 of the NIA Act and dismissed the appeal as not maintainable.

Case Title: Ayaz Ahmad Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 104

Click Here To Read/Download Judgement