Non-Obstante Clause Of Section 14A Of SC/ST Act Shall Have Overriding Effect On General Provisions Of Appeal Under CrPC: Gujarat HC
|The Gujarat High Court has held that the non-obstante clause appearing in Sub-section 1 of Section 14A of the Schedule Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 i.e., SC/ST Act shall have an overriding effect on the general provisions of appeal under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 (CrPC).
The Court was dealing with a batch of pleas seeking condonation of delay of 142 days filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.
A Single Bench of Justice Nisha M. Thakore observed, “… it is held that the non-obstante clause appearing in Sub-section 1 of Section 14A of the Schedule Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 shall have an overriding effect on the general provisions of appeal as provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 in case of filing appeal against any judgement, sentence or order arising out of the said Act. Hence, all these appeals arising out of offence alleged under the provisions of Atrocities Act, filed at the instance of the State or at the instance of the original-complainant are treated as appeals filed under Section 14A of the Atrocities Act.”
Public Prosecutor Mitesh Amin and Advocate Smit P. Vaghela appeared for the applicant/State while Advocate Siddhant Parikh appeared for the respondent/accused.
The lead matter in the group of matters was an application filed at the instance of the State, seeking condonation of delay filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay of 142 days caused in filing appeal under Section 378 (1) of Cr.P.C. Noticing the charge involved, the High Court had called upon the Public Prosecutor to address one aspect of maintainability of the appeal itself, which was moved under Section 378(3) of Cr.P.C.
Since, a similar issue was involved in the matters, where the advocates representing the original complainant/victim had moved the Court by filing appeal under Section 372 of Cr.P.C, all these matters were tagged and heard together on the limited aspect of maintainability of appeal.
The High Court in the above context of the case noted, “It has been noticed that the application seeking condonation of delay has been preferred by the original complainant as well as by the State while moving these appeals under Section 372 and under Section 378(3) of the Code respectively.”
The Court said that the period of limitation has been computed accordingly as compared to 90 days which is prescribed under the SC/ST Act.
“Since, these appeals are now treated to have been filed under Section 14A of the Atrocities Act, registry is requested to reexamine these applications seeking condonation of delay and place all these matters for consideration before the Co-ordinate Bench taking up matters under Section 14A of the Atrocities Act as per the present roster notified by the Hon’ble Chief Justice on the administrative side”, further said the Court.
The Court clarified that it has not gone into the merits of the appeal or the application seeking condonation of delay.
Accordingly, the High Court requested the registry to do the needful.
Cause Title- State of Gujarat v. Sonu Mangliprasad Vishwakarma