Section 14A Of SC/ST Act Contains No Limitation Period To Bar Filing Of Appeal Against Order Under 1989 Act: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court has observed that Section 14A of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 puts no limitation on filing an appeal against an order under the provisions of the 1989 Act.

The Bench of Chief Justice Rajesh Bindal, Justice Ajai Kumar Srivastava-I and Justice Saurabh Lavania clarified that after the Allahabad High Court struck down the second proviso to sub-section(3) of Section14A of the 1989 Act In Re : Provision of Section 14A of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, there is no limitation to file an appeal against an order under the provisions of 1989 Act.

Essentially, the Court was answering a reference made by the Single Judge vide order dated August 3, 2018. After taking into account the essence of this Section, the bench held the following :

- An aggrieved person will not have two remedies namely, i.e. filing an appeal under Section 14A of the 1989 Act as well as filing a bail application in terms of Section 439 Cr.P.C.

- An aggrieved person having remedy of appeal under Section 14A of the 1989 Act, cannot be allowed to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The case in brief

Ghulam Rasool Khan and others/appellants filed an appeal under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act challenging an order of the court below taking cognizance of the matter and summoning them to face trial. The order under which bailable warrants had been issued against the appellants, was also challenged.

It was their contention before the Court that since the appeal had been filed after the expiry of the period of limitation provided under Section 14A (3), the same can be converted into a bail application in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

On the other hand, the Counsels for the respondents submitted that since the second proviso Section 14A (3), which provides a 180 day period of limitation for filing an appeal, has been struck down, now, an appeal against an order passed by the Court below under the provisions of the 1989 Act, can be filed at any time and thus, there was no need to convert the appeal into a bail application.

Before moving ahead, it could be noted that sub-section (3) of Section 14A provides for a period of ninety days to challenge any judgment, sentence or order in appeal. However, delay in filing the appeal can be condoned if sufficient cause is shown.

Further, the second proviso to sub-section (3) [which has been struck down In Re : Provision of Section 14A of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015] provided that no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of one hundred and eighty days. This provides for limited condonation of delay.

Court's observations

At the outset, the Court took into account the ruling in the case of In Re : Provision of Section 14 (a) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (supra) to noted that since 1989 Act is a Special Statute, it shall override the provisions of Cr.P.C.

"Section 14A of the 1989 Act starts with a non-obstante clause which gives overriding effect on anything contained in Cr.P.C. As far as sub-section (3) thereof is concerned, it overrides anything contained in any other law for the time being in force," the Court said.

It may be noted that Section 14A (1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 commences with a non-obstante clause and is designed to override the general provisions contained in the Cr.P.C. Let's read, what does it say:

It may be noted that in this very case, the Allahabad High Court, while holding that an aggrieved person will not have two remedies namely, i.e. filing an appeal under Section 14A of the 1989 Act as well as filing a bail application in terms of Section 439 Cr.P.C., had observed thus:

"The provisions of the Cr.P.C., therefore, would apply only in a situation where an enactment did not make any provision for investigation, enquiry or trial independently or where it was silent on these aspects. The 1989 Act however erects comprehensive machinery for enquiry, investigation and trials of offences under the Act. It is therefore evident that it is the provisions of this special enactment that must prevail when it is found that its provisions prescribe a procedure inconsistent with those in the Cr.P.C. The answer to the first part of the question formulated by us, must necessarily be in the affirmative and we do therefore hold that the provisions of section 439 Cr.P.C. clearly stand eclipsed in light of the special procedure put in place by the 1989 Act."

Lastly, the Court observed that since the second proviso to sub-section(3) of Section14A of the 1989 Act has been struck down by the Court in In Re : Provision of Section 14 (a) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 (supra), there will be no limitation to file an appeal against an order under the provisions of 1989 Act. Hence, the remedies can be availed of as provided.

Relying on this very case, the Court also held that the aggrieved person having remedy of appeal under Section 14A of the 1989 Act, cannot be allowed to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

The Court held thus as it took into account the ruling in the case of In Re : Provision of Section 14 (a) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015, wherein, it was observed thus:

"...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. Insofar as the powers of the Court with respect to the revisional jurisdiction is concerned, we find that the provisions of Section 397 Cr.P.C. stand impliedly excluded by virtue of the special provisions made in Section 14A. This, we hold also in light of our finding that the word "order" as occurring in sub-section(1) of Section 14A would also include intermediate orders."

While answering the questions referred to by the Single Judge, the Court directed that the present criminal appeal be placed before the appropriate Court as per the roster on August 11, 2022.

Case title - Ghulam Rasool Khan and others v. State of U.P. and others

Click Here To Read/download order