SC/ST Act | "Special Court's Order Rejecting Anticipatory Bail Plea Appealable U/S 14A Before HC": Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has observed that an order of the Special Court granting/rejecting bail for the offences punishable under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 is appealable before the HC under Section 14A of the 1989 Act.

The bench of Justice Krishan Pahal further clarified that if the Special Court denies anticipatory bail to the accused, he may move an appeal against the bail denial order before the High Court under Section 14A of the 1989 Act, however, it would not be open to him to file an anticipatory bail before the High Court under Section 438 of CrPC.

In its order, the Court also observed the bar created by Sections 18 and 18A(i) of the SC/ST Act on the grant of anticipatory bail in ST/SC Act offences wouldn't apply if the complaint against the accused does not make out a prima facie case for the applicability of the provisions of the 1989 act.

In other words, the High Court observed that in cases where a prima facie case is not made out against the accused under the SC/ST Act, there, the bar created by sections 18 and 18A (i) of the Act excluding provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Anticipatory Bail), shall not apply and a person could be granted anticipatory bail by the Special Court.

In this regard, the Court took into account the Apex Court's ruling in the case of Prathvi Raj Chauhan vs. Union of India & Others (2020) 4 SCC 727 wherein it was held that an anticipatory bail in a crime where an offence under SC/ST is alleged can be granted only if the Court is satisfied that the allegations levelled do not prima facie make out a case under SC/ST Act.

The case in brief

In the instant case, three accused booked under the SC/ST Act had moved the High Court under its jurisdiction under Section 438 CrPC (not under Section 14A of the 1989 Act) after their anticipatory bail applications were dismissed by the respective Special Judges SC/ST Act.

It was their contention that as per the law laid down in Prathvi Raj Chauhan case, notwithstanding the bar under Sections 18 and 18-A of the Act, the application for anticipatory bail is maintainable as the application for anticipatory bail under SC/ST Act can be filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in the High Court as well as Sessions Court.

However, dismissing their pleas, the Court held that the Special Courts, while dealing with an application for anticipatory bail, must ascertain whether a prima facie case for an offence punishable under the Act is made out, then only the application for anticipatory bail can be considered.

"The order granting or rejecting the anticipatory bail under the provisions of SC/ST Act shall be amenable to the appellate jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 14A of the Act and not Section 438 Cr.P.C," the Court further remarked as it dismissed the instant anticipatory bail applications filed under Section 438 of CrPC.

However, the Court did add that the applicants would be at liberty to file an appeal under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act.

In related news, last month the Kerala High Court has also held that in cases of alleged offences under the SC/ST Act, an application for anticipatory bail can be filed only before the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court constituted under the Act and not before the High Court.

Justice Bechu Kurian Thomas further clarified that High Court has neither concurrent jurisdiction under section 438 CrPC nor original jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.P.C. for grating bail for offences under SC/ST Act and can only exercise appellate jurisdiction under Section 14A.

Read more about the case here: SC/ST Act - Anticipatory Bail Application Can Only Be Filed Before The Special Court, Not High Court: Kerala HC

Case title - Kailash v. State of U.P. and other connected appeals

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 461

Click Here To Read/Download Order