Accused Under SC/ST Act Cannot Directly Move High Court For Anticipatory Bail, Must Approach Special Courts First: Punjab & Haryana HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that an accused under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 is first required to approach the Special Court for anticipatory bail as the high court's original jurisdiction under Section 438 CrPC in such cases stands excluded.Dismissing an anticipatory bail plea of an accused who had directly approached the high court, Justice Ashok Kumar Verma said the order granting or rejecting the anticipatory bail under the provisions of SC/ST Act shall be amenable to the appellate jurisdiction under Section 14A of the Act and not Section 438 CrPC. Stating that Supreme Court in Prathvi Raj Chauhan v. Union of India and Others (2020) 4 SCC 727 has held that if the complainant does not make out a prima facie case for applicability of the provisions of SC/ST Act, the bar created by Section 18 and Section 18A(1) will not apply, Justice Verma said the question arises regarding the forum where the "absence of prima facie case" can be agitated.Observing that the power to grant anticipatory bail is no doubt concurrent in nature - being vested with both the sessions court as well as the high court, the bench said the SC/ST Act however has carved out a special procedure and Special Courts or Exclusive Special Court for dealing with the offences under the enactment.Ruling that the Act has given primacy and exclusivity to the Special Courts, the court said Section 14A(1) & (2) of the SC/ST Act provides for an appeal to the High Court against any order other than an interlocutory order and also against an order granting or refusing bail."In order to avoid unintelligible, incongruous, and vague results and also to avoid confusion among all persons, it is necessary to assign an effective meaning to the expression 'bail' in section 14A of the SC/ST Act, also. Thus the word bail in section 14A(2) would include anticipatory bail also." The court said Section 14A has conferred only an appellate jurisdiction on the High Court in contradistinction to original jurisdiction for the grant of bail. "When the scope of Section 14A of SC/ST Act is appreciated, it is evident that a specific right of appeal to High Courts, has been given against any order granting or refusing bail. Further, a conscious and explicit intention is revealed from the provisions of the SC/ST Act to exclude the exercise of jurisdiction under section 438 of the CrPC. Consequently, the appellate jurisdiction alone can be exercised by the High Court, under section 14A." The court further observed that only the courts constituted under Section 14 of the Act can have jurisdiction to entertain an application for bail and the power of the Court of Sessions and of the High Court in its original criminal jurisdiction to entertain an application under Section 438 or Section 439 of the Cr.P.C had been impliedly taken away by Section 14A of the said Act. "An appeal will lie only against an order of the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court and unless there is an order of the Special Court refusing bail, the accused will have no right to file an appeal before the High Court praying for grant of bail to them," it added. Case Title: Vinod Bindal v. State of Haryana Citation: CRM-M-57392-2022 Coram: Justice Ashok Kumar Verma Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (PH) 326 Click Here To Read/Download the Order

Accused Under SC/ST Act Cannot Directly Move High Court For Anticipatory Bail, Must Approach Special Courts First: Punjab & Haryana HC

Rahul Garg

Tags