NIA Act | Appeals Must Be Filed Before Division Bench Even If Order Is Passed By Sessions Court Acting In Absence Of Special Court: Jharkhand HC

The Jharkhand High Court has ruled that appeals related to scheduled offences under the National Investigation Agency (NIA) Act, 2008, must be filed before a Division Bench of the High Court, even when the original judgement or order is passed by a Sessions Court acting in the absence of a designated Special Court.In the ruling delivered by Justice Rajesh Shankar, it was observed, “Looking to the gravity and seriousness of the offences under the Schedule of the Act, 2008, the legislature has made specific provision under section 21 of the said Act for filing of appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court to expedite the hearing of such cases. Thus, the word “Special Court” as mentioned in section 21 of the Act, 2008 has to be given purposive construction so that the purpose of the provision as intended by the legislature may be achieved.”“The intention of the legislature while putting the said section must have been that a Session Court dealing with any scheduled offence under the Act, 2008 even in absence of issuance of any notification either by the Central Government or by the State Government under Section 11 & 22 respectively, has to be considered as a Special Court for the purpose of Section 21 of the Act, 2008 and in such case an appeal against the judgment, sentence or order including an order refusing anticipatory bail by the Session Court, will lie before the Division Bench of the High Court,” Justice Shankar emphasised.BackgroundThe decision came in response to an anticipatory bail application related to offences under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. The petitioner argued that, since the impugned order was issued by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge-III, Palamau at Daltonganj, and not by a designated Special Court, an appeal should be maintainable before the regular Bench of the High Court rather than the Division Bench. The question before the Court for its consideration was whether an anticipatory bail application is maintainable before the regular Bench of the High Court against an order by the Additional Sessions Judge that rejected the petitioner's anticipatory bail plea concerning offences punishable under Sections 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. These offences were listed as scheduled offences under the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008. The Court also had to consider whether an appeal is maintainable before the Division Bench of the High Court pursuant to Section 21(4) of the Act, 2008.The Court first reviewed the relevant provisions of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, emphasising that the Act was promulgated to establish an investigation agency at the national level to investigate and prosecute offences that threaten the sovereignty, security, and integrity of India, the security of States, friendly relations with foreign States, and offences under Acts enacted to implement international treaties, agreements, conventions, and resolutions of the United Nations and other international organisations.Expounding on Section 21 of the Act, 2008, the Court noted that it, “explicitly provides that an appeal shall lie from any judgement, sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court only to the High Court both on facts and on law which shall be heard by a Bench of two Judges of the High Court and except as aforesaid, no appeal or revision shall lie to any court from any judgement, sentence or order including an interlocutory order of a Special Court. It has further been provided that an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of the Special Court granting or refusing bail.”The Court placed reliance on the Supreme Court's ruling in Bikramjit Singh v. State of Punjab, (2020) 10 SCC 616, where the Apex Court held that all scheduled offences, whether investigated by the National Investigation Agency or by the State Government's investigating agencies, are to be tried exclusively by Special Courts established under the Act, 2008. The Court noted that, in the absence of a designated court notified by either the Central or State Government, the jurisdiction falls to the Court of Session.Building on this precedent, the Court observed that the Court of Session, when dealing with scheduled offences under the Act, 2008 in the absence of a Special Court constituted under Sections 11 and 22 of the Act by either the Central Government or the State Government, is treated as a Special Court. The Court noted that it retains all the powers to follow the procedures outlined in Chapter IV of the Act, 2008. The Court further stated that while Section 21 of the Act provides for appeals to the Division Bench of the High Court against any judgment, sentence, or order passed by a Special Court, this provision would also extend to any judgment, sentence, or order passed by the Court of Session when it exercises the powers of a Special Court in the absence of a designated Special Court. The Court interpreted the term...

NIA Act | Appeals Must Be Filed Before Division Bench Even If Order Is Passed By Sessions Court Acting In Absence Of Special Court: Jharkhand HC

Bhavya Singh

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Bhavya Singh

NIA Act | Appeals Must Be Filed Before Division Bench Even If Order Is Passed By Sessions Court Acting In Absence Of Special Court: Jharkhand HC

Bhavya Singh

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Bhavya Singh

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers