NIA Act- Division Bench Of High Court Should Hear Revision Petition Against Special Court Order : Supreme Court

Holding that a revision petition against an order passed by a Special Court under the National Investigation Agency can lie only before a division bench of a High Court, the Supreme Court has set aside an order passed by the Kerala High Court in the case relating to alleged Maoist leader Roopesh.

A bench comprising Justices MR Shah and AS Bopanna set aside the order passed by the single bench and remanded the matter back to the High Court for being heard by a division bench. The matter should be decided expeditiously, preferably within a period of 6 months, the Supreme Court added.

On September 24, 2019, a single bench of the High Court had allowed a revision petition filed by Roopesh under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to discharge him of the offences under Sections 20 and 38 of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act and Section 124A(sedition) of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court had quashed the charges framed by the Special Court under the UAPA on the ground that the sanctioning authority had not followed the statutorily prescribed time limit while granting sanction for prosecution.

Challenging the High Court verdict, the State of Kerala approached the Supreme Court(the case was investigated by the Kerala Police). Senior Advocate Maninder Singh, appearing for the State of Kerala, argued that as per Section 21 of the NIA Act, the revision ought to have been heard by the division bench of the High Court.

It was submitted that in view of Section 21(1) of the NIA Act, the revision application against the order passed by the Special Court refusing to discharge the accused ought to have been heard by the Division Bench as mandated under sub-section (2) of Section 21 of the NIA Act.

Therefore, he prayed for setting aside the order and remanding the matter back to the High Court

Senior Advocate Kamini Jaiswal, appearing for Roopesh, did not dispute the legal position argued by the appellant.

In this backdrop, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal by ordering as follows :

"In view of the above, all these appeals succeed and the common impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court passed in discharging the accused is hereby quashed and set aside and the matters are remanded to the High Court to decide the Revision Petition Nos. 732 of 2019 to 734 of 2019 afresh by the Division Bench in accordance with law and on merits. The Revision Petitions, on remand, shall be decided and disposed of by the Division Bench of the High Court at the earliest and preferably, within a period of six months from the date of receipt of the present order".

The Supreme Court clarified that the appeal is allowed on the above technical ground and that it has not expressed anything on merits.

"It goes without saying that all the contentions/defences, which may be available to the respective parties are kept open to be considered by the Division Bench of the High Court in accordance with law and on its own merits", the bench noted in the order.

Case Details

Case Title : State of Kerala vs.Roopesh

Coram : Justice MR Shah, Justice AS Bopanna

Citation : LL 2021 SC 613

Click here to read/download the judgment