Patna High Court - Orders
Usha Devi vs State Of Bihar And Anr on 8 April, 2019
Author: Aditya Kumar Trivedi
Bench: Aditya Kumar Trivedi
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.4792 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-407 Year-2016 Thana- SIKARPUR District- West Champaran
======================================================
Suman Mahto S/o- Krishna Mahto, Resident of Village - Sofwa, P.S.-
Shikarpur, District- West Champaran.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1806 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2014 Thana- SAKATPUR District- Darbhanga
======================================================
RAJMANI @ RAJMANI SHARMA @ RAJMANI SAI CENTRE
TRADERS Late Ram Anugrah Sharma Permanent Resident of - Bi Pass
Road, New Registry Court, Maheshwari, Police Station- Jamui, District-
Jamui, Present address-Sai Centre (Traders), 1st floor, Sarmash Kothi, Old
Post Office Line, Jamal Road, Police Station- Kotwali, District- Patna
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Sajjan Chaudhary Late Satynarayan Chaudhary Village and Post- Lagma,
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 245 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-38 Year-2017 Thana- SC/ST District- Darbhanga
======================================================
Dr. Ashok Kumar Srivastava @ Ashok Kumar Srivastava and Anr
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar ... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 61 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2018 Thana- SC/ST District- Buxar
======================================================
1. Bithal Nath Tripathi @ Dr. Vithal Nath Tripathi
2. Gokul Nath Tiwari Both are sons of Late Basudeo Tripathi @ Basdeo Tiwari
3. Lalit Kumar Tripathi @ Lalit Raman Tripathi, Son of Madan Mohan
Tripathi.
4. Manju Devi W/o- Lalit Kumar Tripathi.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
2/49
5. Abhay Tripathi, Son of Lalit Kumar Tripathi
6. Baijnath Yadav Son of Late Bihari Yadav
7. Suresh Yadav @ Suresh Singh, Son of Late Bihari Yadav All are Resident of
Village - Nandan, Police Station- Dumraon,District-Buxar.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
State Of Bihar and ano. ... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 835 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2018 Thana- SC/ST District- Kishanganj
======================================================
ANUJ KUMAR SINHA @ CHINTU KUMAR Son of Jyotindra Nath Sinha,
Resident of Village -Kasera Patti Road, Ward no 6, Kishanganj Bazar, P.S.-
kishanganj, Distt.- Kishanganj
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Shivaji Kumar Basak Son of Late Anant Prasad Basak Resident of Village
-Kasera Patti Road no.6, P.S.- kishanganj, Distt.- Kishanganj
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 535 of 2019
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.4128 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-31 Year-2017 Thana- SC/ST District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
MAHANTH RAM MOHAN DAS @ RAM MOHAN DAS CHELE WARIS
LATE MAHANTH RAM SUNDAR DAS, S/o Late Ram Lakhan Singh
resident of Paktola Tole Bhataulia Math, Ward no.1, P.S-Dumra, Distt.-
Sitamarhi.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Mahesh Paswan S/o Late Sakhichand Paswan, resident of village-Paktola
Tole, Bhataulia, P.S-Dumra, Distt.-Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4823 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-20 Year-2018 Thana- KHUSRUPUR District- Patna
======================================================
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
3/49
Mukesh Kumar Son of Devendra Singh Resident of Village - Baikatpur, P.S.-
Khusrupur in the District - Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Munna Kumar Paswan Son of Vishwanath Paswan Resident of Village -
Baikatpur Devi Asthan, P.s.- Khusrupur, District - Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4567 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-614 Year-2010 Thana- VAISALI COMPLAINT CASE District-
Vaishali
======================================================
1. Amarendra Kumar Singh @ Dadan Singh
2. Dharmendra Kumar Singh Both are sons of Late Brijnandan Singh, Resident
of Mukundpur Bhath, Police Station- Jandaha, District- Vaishali.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Lauki Paswan, Son of Late Shivnandan Paswan @ Shiva Paswan, Resident
of Vishannpur Silauthar, Police Station- Jandaha, District- Vaishali.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4401 of 2018
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.49984 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-100 Year-2014 Thana- ARA MUFFSIL District- Bhojpur
======================================================
Garju Gond
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar and Ors ... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 233 of 2019
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.54130 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-105 Year-2016 Thana- SAKURABAD District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Nakul Singh and Ors
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
4/49
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
State Of Bihar and Anr
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 56 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-162 Year-2013 Thana- MINAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Nand Kishore Singh @ nand kishoe singh and Ors muzaffarpur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3960 of 2018
In
Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2310 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-856 Year-2015 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Mukesh Kumar and Anr
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar Through Commissioner Tirhut Division, Mizaffarpur and
Ors
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4487 of 2018
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.58375 of 2015
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2012 Thana- KADAMKUAN District- Patna
======================================================
Dr. Sunita Kumari
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
State Of Bihar and Anr
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3166 of 2018
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
5/49
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-131 Year-2016 Thana- BUDDHACOLONY District- Patna
======================================================
1. Yashoda Devi, W/o Late Ram Murti Rai,
2. Mamta Devi W/o Manoj Kumar Yadav, Both the Appellants R/o Dujra Devi
Asthan, In Front of Gate No. 15, P.O.- G.P.O. , P.S.- Budha Colony, Distt.-
Patna.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Joytshna Kumari D/o Rajesh Kumar , R/o Bash Ghat , Kali Mandir, House
of Umesh Show, P.S.- Budha Colony, P.O.- G.P.O., Distt.- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3505 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2017 Thana- SC/ST District- Begusarai
======================================================
1. RAGHBENDRA PRASAD SINGH @ RAGHWENDRA PRASAD SINGH,
Son of Late Bhuvneshwari Prasad Singh,
2. Abhishek Kumar @ Abhishek Raghav,
3. Abhinav Kumar Raghav, Sons of Dr. Raghbendra Prasad Singh, All resident
of Mohalla- Rajendra Nagar, Gachhi Tola, Ward No.32, P.S.- Town, District-
Begusarai.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Chandra Shekhar Paswan, Son of Late Khobi Paswan, Resident of Mohalla-
Rajendra Nagar, Gachhi Tola, Ward No. 32, P.S.- Town, District- Begusarai.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 63523 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1454 Year-2017 Thana- WEST CHAMPARAN COMPLAINT
District- West Champaran
======================================================
Lakshmi Kanta Mohanty Son of late Adwaita Prasad Mohanty R/o Salt Lake
City II, P.S. Bidhannagar, Distt. Kolkata W.B, 700091
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Ranju Kumari Wife of Shri Gopal Thakur R/o Gaislal Chowk Ward No. 10,
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
6/49
Purani Gudri, P.S. Bettiah Town, District- West Champaran.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3701 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-155 Year-2010 Thana- WARISNAGAR District- Samastipur
======================================================
Sudhir Kumar Deo Son of Late Ramdeo Prasad Deo, Resident of Mohalla-
Bahadurpur, P.O. and P.S.- Samastipur, District- Samastipur.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Shankar Ram, Son of Yadu Ram, Resident of Village- Charo, Panchayat-
Purnahi, P.S.- Waris Nagar, District- Samastipur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3878 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-497 Year-2016 Thana- PATORI District- Samastipur
======================================================
1. Sarvajeet Nipun @ Jiwacch Pandey, son of late Nawal Kishore Pandey
2. Ram Pukari Devi W/o Late Nawal Kishore Pandey Both are Resident of
Village-Dharampur Bande,P.S. Patori, Distt.-Samastipur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Ganesh Ram R/o late Mahendra Ram Resident of Village-Dharampur Bande
P.S. Patori Samastipur
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3941 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-261 Year-2018 Thana- PATNA COMPLAINT CASE District-
Patna
======================================================
DURAG SINGH RAJPUROHIT S/o Guman Singh Rajpurohit, resident of
Village- Langera, P.S.- Barmer Rural, District- Barmer, presently residing at
Plot No. 89, Langera, Barmer, Rajasthan.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
7/49
2. Rakesh Paswan, S/o Dasrath Paswan, R/o Village Tetua Par Dumrao, P.S.-
Asthawan, District- Nalanda, presently residing at Digha Ghat, Gate No. 90,
P.S.- Digha, District- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4223 of 2018
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34769 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-563 Year-2009 Thana- SC/ST District- Vaishali
======================================================
Panna Devi
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
State Of Bihar and Anr
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4502 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-5 Year-2016 Thana- ROSHANGANJ District- Gaya
======================================================
1. Ran Vijay Kumar, Son of Late Ramnandan Prasad @ Ramnandan Singh,
Resident of Village- Chhotka Jamuara Khurd, P.S.- Raushanganj, District-
Gaya.
2. Santosh Chaudhary, Son of Teni Chaudhary, Resident of Village- Khapdod,
P.S.- Banke Bazar, District- Gaya.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Sanju Kumari D/o Late Randeo Manjhi, Resident of Village- Shekhwara,
P.S.- Magadh University, District- Gaya.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4588 of 2018
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.50515 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-944 Year-2013 Thana- AHIYAPUR District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Raj Kumari Devi and Ors
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
State Of Bihar and Anr
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
8/49
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 992 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-199 Year-2016 Thana- CHAPRA TOWN District- Saran
======================================================
1. Anil Kumar Singh, Son of Dharam Nath Singh
2. Kiran Devi Wife of Anil Kumar Singh
3. Chhotu Singh Son of Anil Kumar Singh All are residents of Village -
Dahiyava Tola, P.S. - Chapra Town, District - Saran.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 2836 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-86 Year-2018 Thana- HAJIPUR SADAR District- Vaishali
======================================================
Usha Devi Wife of Ram Chandra Rajak, Resident of Village- Ismailpur, P.S.-
Sadar, Hajipur, District- Vaishali.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Prabhash Kumar, Son of Randhir Rai, Resident of Village- Ismailpur, P.S.-
Sadar Hajipur, District- Vaishali.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3287 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-16 Year-2016 Thana- SC/ST District- Madhubani
======================================================
1. PRAMILA PURVE, wife of Ajay Purve,
2. Ajay Kumar Purve @ Ajay Purve son of Late Hajari Purve. Both are
resident of Village- Mohalla- Jaynagar Basti, P.S. Jaynagar, District-
Madhubani.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Laxman Safi Son of Late Girwal Safi, resident of Village- Jaynagar Basti,
P.S. Jaynagar, District- Madhubani.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
9/49
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3458 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-141 Year-2012 Thana- PATORI District- Samastipur
======================================================
Ram Bilash Rai S/o Late Laxmi Rai, R/o Vill.- Sithra Bhuiya Asthan, P.S.-
Patori, District- Samastipur.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3404 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-27 Year-2016 Thana- SC/ST District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
Sarvajit S/o Haribansh Narayan Singh, R/o Vill.- Baranti, P.S.- Raja Pakar,
District- Vaishali.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Sri Krishna Kumar Chaudhary, S/o Gonaur Chaudhary, R/o Vill.- Musachak,
P.S.- Bairganiya, District- Sitamarhi.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4093 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-77 Year-2007 Thana- GHOSWARI District- Patna
======================================================
1. LOKI MAHTO, S/o Late Kesho Mahto,
2. Siya Sharan Mahto, S/o Late Kesho Mahto,
3. Brahamdeo Mahto @ Indo Mahto, S/o Late Kesho Mahto,
4. Dharo Mahto, S/o Loki Mahto,
5. English Mahto, S/o Loki Mahto,
6. Subodh Mahto, S/o Shiya Sharan Mahto,
7. Lalo Mahto, S/o Brahamdeo Mahto @ Indo Mahto,
8. Arvind Mahto, S/o Shiya Sharan Mahto,
9. Bijali Mahto, S/o Loki Mahto, All resident of Village- Ishanagar, P.S.-
Ghoswari, District- Patna.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
10/49
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Kedar Paswan, S/o Sri Chandrika Paswan, Resident of Village- Ishanagar,
P.S.- Ghoswari, District- Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4044 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-156 Year-2015 Thana- RAJAON District- Banka
======================================================
Rameshwar Sah @ Rameshwar Prasad @ Rameshwar Prasad Sah Son of Late
Bhagwat Sah, Resident of Village- Aliganj, P.S.- Babarganj, District-
Bhagalpur.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. THE STATE OF BIHAR
2. Dilip Kumar Das Son of Shri Ganesh Harijan R/o Village- Piprahadih, P.O.
Morama, P.S. Rajoun, District- Banka.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4134 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-45 Year-2016 Thana- SC/ST District- Sitamarhi
======================================================
MAHANT VEER RAGHAV PRAPANNA RAMANUJ DAS @
RAMCHANDRA SHARMA @ MAHANT VEER RAGHAV @ MAHANTH
VEER RAG Son of late Awadh Sharma and Cheela of late Sampat Kumar
Ramanuj Das Resident of Village-Hanuman Nagar, Tole-Oena, P.S.-Runni
Saidpur, District-Sitamarhi.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4111 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1 Year-2017 Thana- SC/ST BAGHA District- West Champaran
======================================================
1. Nasim Akhtar, Son of Nabi Hussain
2. Nadim Akhtar Son of Nabi Hussain null
3. Nabi Hussain S/o Late Mansoor Ansari All Resident of Village-Jamadar
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
11/49
Tola,P.S. Chautarwa,Distt.-West Champaran
4. Md. Mustaque S/o Late Md. Manir Ansari Resident of Village-Marwari Tola
Bagaha Bazar,Ward No.28,P.S. Bagaha,Distt.-West Champaran
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Ram Pravesh Ram S/o Late Mundirka Ram Resident of Village-Jamadar
Toal,P.S. Chautarwa,Distt.-West Champaran
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4294 of 2018
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.41396 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-54 Year-2014 Thana- SC/ST District- Khagaria
======================================================
1. Shyam Sarraf, Son of Baldeo Sarraf Resident of Main Road Khagaria, P.S-
Khagaria, District- Khagaria
2. Shivjee Sarraf Son of Baldeo Sarraf Resident of Main Road Khagaria, P.S-
Khagaria, District- Khagaria
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Dharmendra Ram Son of Gango Ram R/o village- Labhgaon , P.S- Gangaur,
District- Khagaria
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4394 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-201 Year-2016 Thana- BIHRA District- Saharsa
======================================================
Brahmdev Singh @ Brahma Dev Singh and Anr
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 189 of 2019
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-228 Year-2016 Thana- PARSABAZAR District- Patna
======================================================
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
12/49
1. Upkar Pritam Kumar Santoshi, Late Lala Prasad Singh Resident of Ramesh
Colony, Kurthaul, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna
2. Manju Rani Upkar Pritam Kumar Santoshi Resident of Ramesh Colony,
Kurthaul, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna
3. Roushan Kumar Upkar Pritam Kumar Santoshi Resident of Ramesh Colony,
Kurthaul, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna
4. Gaurav Kumar @Saurabh Kumar Upkar Pritam Kumar Santoshi Resident of
Ramesh Colony, Kurthaul, P.S.- Parsa Bazar, District- Patna
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Kamal Devi Ravi Das Babu Lal Ravi Das Resident of Ramesh Colony,
Kurthaul, P.S. Parsa Bazar, District -Patna
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3764 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-30 Year-2017 Thana- BARABAR TOURIST District- Jehanabad
======================================================
Md. Basir Alam @ Basir Alam Son of Md. Abdul Sattar, Resident of Village-
Dakra, P.S.- Barabar Paryatan, District- Jehanabad.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4281 of 2018
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.13865 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-106 Year-2014 Thana- SC/ST District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Raman Kumar
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4640 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-396 Year-2018 Thana- SAKRA District- Muzaffarpur
======================================================
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
13/49
1. Jagdeo Das, S/o Late Jhagru Das
2. Sunaina Devi W/o Jagdeo Das
3. Kapal Das S/o Late Jhagru Das
4. Chinta Devi W/o Kapal Das All Resident of Village-Mahmadpur
Mohan,P.O. Mahmadpur Badal,P.S. Sakra,Distt.-Muzaffarpur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4847 of 2018
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.55048 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-68 Year-2016 Thana- SC/ST District- Rohtas
======================================================
Shakil Ahamad @ Shakil Ahmed
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
The State Of Bihar
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1208 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-19 Year-2017 Thana- SC/ST District- Darbhanga
======================================================
1. Mohan Yadav, S/o Late Yogendra Yadav,
2. Amarjeet Yadav S/o Mohan Yadav,
3. Babloo Yadav S/o Mohan Yadav,
4. Pappu Yadav S/o Mohan Yadav, All are R/o vill.- Dihlahi, P.S.- Bishanpur,
Disrict- Darbhanga.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Ram Chandra Paswan S/o Late Janak Paswan, R/o Vill.- Dihahi, P.S.-
Bishanpur, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 2938 of 2018
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
14/49
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-1089 Year-2013 Thana- KHAGARIA COMPALINT CASE
District- Khagaria
======================================================
Awadesh Singh son of Govind Singh, resident of Village- Pachaut, P.O.-
Pachaut, P.S.- Beldaur, District- Khagaria.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Amarnandan Prabhat son of Late Sahdev Paswan resident of Village-
Beldaur, P.S. Beldaur, District Khagaria.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3360 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-222 Year-1993 Thana- MAHUA District- Vaishali
======================================================
Nagendra Ram S/o Late Rakshya Ram @ Ran...aya Ram, R/o Vill.-
Bilandpur, P.S.- Mahua , District- Vaishali.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Ramji Singh S/o Late Ram Shreth Singh, R/o Vill.- Bilandpur, P.S.- Mahua,
District- Vaishali.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3796 of 2018
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-661 Year-2016 Thana- BHABHU(KAIMUR) COMPLAIN C
District- Kaimur (Bhabua)
======================================================
1. Nageshwar Upadhyay @ Rameshwar Upadhyay, Son of Ram Kewal
Upadhyay
2. Vijay Kumar Upadhyay@ Vijay Upadhyay Son of Nagbeshwar Upadhyay
3. Ganesh Kumar Upadhyay@ Ganesh Upadhyay Son of Nageshwar
Upadhyay All are Resident of Village- Kharigawan, Police Station-
Chainpur, District- Kaimur, Bhabua.
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. State Of Bihar
2. Nanhku Dusadh Son of late Bharat Dusadh Resident of Village-
Kharigawan, Police Station- Chainpur, District- Kaimur, Bhabua.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
15/49
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
with
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4485 of 2018
In
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.8984 of 2017
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-169 Year-2012 Thana- KADAMKUAN District- Patna
======================================================
Rajesh Kumar Thakur
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
State Of Bihar and Anr
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4792 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shiv Kumar Dwivedy
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 1806 of 2019)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Surya Swetabh
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sri Satya Nand Shukla
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 245 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Girish Chandra Jha
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 61 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Devi Das Srivastava
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 835 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 535 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Arvind Kumar Jha
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Usha Kumari 1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4823 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Raj Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4567 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Dinesh Maharaj
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4401 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Subhash Kumar Jha
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 233 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Bhaskar Shankar
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 56 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Diwakar Prasad Karn
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3960 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Archana Sinha @ Archana Shahi-Advocate
For the O.P. : Mr. Manish Kumar No.13-Advocate
Mr. Rohit Kumar-Advocate
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
16/49
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan-S.P.P.
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4487 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Rajkumar Rajesh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Ram Shankar Das
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3166 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Raghav Prasad No.-1
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3505 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Randhir Kumar No-1
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No. 63523 of 2018)
For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Alok Kumar @ Alok Kr Shahi
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Sri Chandrasen Prasad Singh
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3701 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vijay Kumar Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3878 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vijay Anand
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3941 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Saket Tiwary
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4223 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Madhurendra Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4502 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Sudhir Kumar Sinha
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4588 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Prafull Chandra Jha
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 992 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Niranjan Kumar-Advocate
Smt. Smita Prasad-Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan-S.P.P.
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 2836 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Mukesh Kumar Jha
For the O.P. Mr. Manish Chandra Gandhi-Advocate
Mr. Himanshu Ranjan-Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Sadanand Paswan-S.P.P.
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3287 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Gagan Deo Yadav
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3458 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Anil Kumar Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3404 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Awadhesh Kumar Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4093 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Anil Kumar No.1
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4044 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Shyam Kishor Das
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4134 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vaidehi Raman Prasad Singh
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019
17/49
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4111 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vijay Kr Singh No. 1
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4294 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Raj Dular Sah
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4394 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Ramakant Sharma-Sr. Advocate
Mr.Madhav Jha-Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna-S.P.P.
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 189 of 2019)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Vijay Anand
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3764 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Pritish Kumar Lal
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4281 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Manoj Kumar Manoj
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Sri Sadanand Paswan
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4640 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Diwakar Prasad Karn
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4847 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Raghunandan Kumar Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 1208 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Iqbal Asif Niazi
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 2938 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Binod Kumar Singh
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3360 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Ratan Kumar Sinha
For the Respondent/s : Mr.Binay Krishna
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 3796 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Rajesh Kumar
For the Respondent/s : Smt Usha Kumari No-1
(In CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No. 4485 of 2018)
For the Appellant/s : Mr.Rajkumar Rajesh
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Surendra Kumar
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI
CAV ORDER
10 8-04-2019Apart from other subject, as per roster, the Criminal Appeal arising out of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (Short as Act) have also been assigned excluding the bail matters. When the respective file has been gone through in consonance with the submission having at the end of the learned Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 18/49 respective counsels, some of the records even divulge an incidence of conversion from Criminal Miscellaneous Petition purported to be under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to Criminal Appeal under waled of Section 14-A of S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. A query has been made whether the prayer (detailed hereinafter) would really attract its adjudication under Criminal Appeal exclusively under the guise of Section 14-A of the S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The nature of prayer, which has been made and perceived relating to different memo of appeal, so far relevant to the present episode is as follows:-
1) Quashing of the prosecution
2) Quashing of the order of the cognizance
3) Quashing of the charge/ Rejection of prayer of discharge
4) Refusal of prayer under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C.
5) Refusal of prayer/ allow of prayer under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C.
6) Consideration of Delay in filing Appeal, provision for Condonation of Limitation.
2. With great respect to the learned Co-ordinate Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 19/49 Bench, I did not carry the same view. As per direction given by the Apex Court in Om Prakash Agarwal Since Deceased Thr. LRS and others v. Vishan Dayal Rajpoot and another reported in A.I.R. 2018 SC 5486, observing that whenever there happens to be difference of opinion amongst Co-ordinate Bench, the matter is to be referred to Larger Bench. On that score alone, would have come up before the Division Bench. However, I am inclined to record the reasons, though, summarily, as I do not want to make the reference cumbersome, as after all, on reference the Division Bench has to answer. So, only relevant points are being sketched.
3. The first step needs incorporation of Section 14(A) of the Act, the relevant provisions so prescribed under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, guiding the issue is to be quoted below.
"[14A. Appeals.--(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie, from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court or an Exclusive Special Court, to the High Court both on facts and on law. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3) of section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court granting or refusing bail.
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 20/49 (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period of ninety days from the date of the judgment, sentence or order appealed from:
Provided that the High Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of ninety days if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of ninety days:
Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of the period of one hundred and eighty days. (4) Every appeal preferred under sub-section (1) shall, as far as possible, be disposed of within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal .]
4. Two more provisions are also relevant to be taken note of. The first one is:-
"Section- 2(b) "Code" means the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973;
Section-2(bd) "Exclusive Special Court" means the Exclusive Special Court established under sub- section (1) of section 14 exclusively to try the offences under this Act;
Section2(d) ―Special Court‖ means a Court of Session specified as a Special Court in section 14; Section-2(f) the words and expressions used but not defined in this Act and defined in the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872) or the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 21/49 (2 of 1974), as the case may be, shall be deemed to have the meanings respectively assigned to them in those enactments.]"
And the Second one is:-
"Section-1[14.Special Court and Exclusive Special Court.--(1) For the purpose of providing for speedy trial, the State Governmentshall, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, by notification inthe Official Gazette, establish an Exclusive Special Court for one or more Districts:
Provided that in Districts where less number of cases under this Act is recorded,the State Government shall, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the HighCourt, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify for such Districts, the Court ofSession to be a Special Court to try the offences under this Act:.
Provided further that the Courts so established or specified shall have powertodirectly take cognizance of offences under this Act.
(2) It shall be the duty of the State Government to establish adequate number ofCourts to ensure that cases under this Act are disposed of within a period of twomonths, as far as possible.
(3) In every trial in the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court, theproceedings shall be Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 22/49 continued from day-to-day until all the witnesses in attendancehave been examined, unless the Special Court or the Exclusive Special Court finds theadjournment of the same beyond the following day to be necessary for reasons to berecorded in writing:
Provided that when the trial relates to an offence under this Act, the trial shall, asfar as possible, be completed within a period of two months from the date of filing ofthe charge sheet.]"
5. The other aspect is exclusion of some of the specific provisions of the Cr.P.C. and those are, as per Section 18 of the Act, the privilege having in favour of accused with regard to pre-arrest bail in accordance with Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. has been seized and in likewise manner, as per Section 19, after conviction, the application of Section 360 of the Cr.P.C. as well as Probation of Offenders Act would not be available in case convict is found more than 18 years of age. So far preferential aspect is concerned, Section 20 of the Act gives overriding effect and for better appreciation, the same is quoted below:-
"20. Act to override other laws.--Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 23/49 anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or any custom or usage or any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law."
6. At the present moment, it looks pertinent to reckon the corresponding provision so laid down under the Code of Criminal Procedure acknowledging the procedure so laid down under the Special Law and for better appreciation, the same is quoted below:-
"Section-4 of the Cr.P.C.:- Trial of offences under the Indian Penal Code and other laws.
(1) All offences under the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860 ) shall be investigated, inquired into, tried, and otherwise dealt with according to the provisions hereinafter contained.
(2) All offences under any other law shall be investigated, inquired into, tried, and otherwise dealt with according to the same provisions, but subject to any enactment for the time being in force regulating the manner or place of investigating, inquiring into, trying or otherwise dealing with such offences.
Section-5 of the Cr.P.C.:- Saving. Nothing contained in this Code shall, in the absence of a specific provision to the contrary, affect any special Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 24/49 or local law for the time being in force, or any special jurisdiction or power conferred, or any special form of procedure prescribed, by any other law for the time being in force."
7. That means to say, any kind of procedure so prescribed under the Special Law will have its prerogative and will command the procedure of since inception, and the said perception is found properly shaped after having conjoint reading of Section 4, Section 5 of Cr.P.C. in consonance with Section 20 of the Act. When such accessibility is recognized, then the following events found impeded :-
I) Power of cognizance II) No privilege of anticipatory bail III) No provision of revision IV) No application for provision of Section 360 Cr.P.C. nor Probation of Offenders Act at post conviction stage where convict is about 18 years.
8. From plain reading of Section 20 of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, it is manifest that its empowerment is acknowledged only in such circumstance where there happens to be inconsistency, otherwise, as is evident, the procedure so prescribed for sailing the trial under the Criminal Procedure Code will follow, as no separate Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 25/49 procedure is found so prescribed under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act relating thereto.
9. Furthermore, as is evident, the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act is not at all impounding the inherent power of the High Court, nor the aim and object of the Act does suggest so, though some power, so envisaged under Cr.P.C. has been imbeciled and substituted by proper enactment having duly engrafted under Section 14(A) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and those are:-
I) The judgment, sentence or order not being an interlocutory order will be appealable before the High Court passed by the Special or Exclusive Special Court. II) Any order passed by Special or Exclusive Special Court concerning bail will be appealable. III) Limitation has been prescribed normally-ninety days, which may extend to further ninety days without any relaxation furthermore.
IV) Appeal has to be disposed of within three months on admission.
10. That means to say, though the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act properly identify the forum to be approached against a judgment, sentence or order not an interlocutory order, save and except, an exception that the bail order, out and out an interlocutory order has also been made Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 26/49 appealable. In likewise manner, having obstinate clause, 14(A) (B) has got some sort of bearing over ceasing the right by efflux of time, maximum to the extent of 180 days, without having any kind of reference to Limitation Act. Moreover, the amendment is found enforceable since 26.01.2016 and that being so, needs proper adjudication with regard to its implication, having two different contingency, pre-amendment, post-amendment.
11. Now, coming to post-amendment stage, the question for consideration now remains:-
1. How there would be the classification of an order;
2. The condonation of limitation;
3. The power of the High Court;
4. Application of the amended Act;
12. Neither under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, there happens to be definition of the order classifying the final order nor interlocutory order. In absence thereof, the said interpretation is to be borrowed from the Cr.P.C. It is apparent that there also happens to be complete absence of definition under Cr.P.C. with regard to final order or interlocutory order. The classification of the order as an interlocutory is found under Section 397(2) of the Cr.P.C., but again without any proper mode of identification. It simply Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 27/49 suggests as:-
"397. Calling for records to exercise powers of revision.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxxx (2) The powers of revision conferred by sub- section (1) shall not be exercised in relation to any interlocutory order passed in any appeal, inquiry, trial or other proceeding.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx xxxxxxx"
13. At an earlier occasion, the Apex Court in Amar Nath and others v. State of Haryana and others reported in 1977 CRI.L.J. 1891 considered the same and held as follows:-
"6. Let us now proceed to interpret the provisions of s. 397 against the historical background of these facts. Sub- section (2) of s. 397 of the 1973 Code may be extracted thus:
"The powers of revision conferred by Sub- section (1) shall not be exercised in relation to any interlocutory order passed ;in any appeal, inquiry, trial or other proceeding."
The main question which falls for determination in this appeal is as to, the what is the connotation of Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 28/49 the term "interlocutory order" as appearing in sub- s. (2) of s. 397 which bars any revision of such an order by the High Court. The term "interlocutory order" is a term of well-known legal significance and does not present any serious diffident. It has been used in various statutes including the Codeof Civil Procedure, Letters Patent of the High Courts and other like statutes. In Webster's New World Dictionary "interlocutory" has been defined as an order other than final decision. Decided cases have laid down that interlocutory orders to be appealable must be those which decide 'the rights and liabilities of the parties concerning a particular aspect. It seems to, us thatthe term "interlocutory order" in s. 397(2) of the 1973 Code has beenused in a restricted sense and not in any broad or artistic sense.It merely denotes orders of a purely interim or temporary nature which do not decide or touch the important rights, or the liabilities of the parties. Any order which substantially affects the, right of the accused, or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be an interlocutory order so as to bar a revision to the High Court against that order, because that would be against the very object which formed the basis for insertion of this particular provision in s. 397 of the, 1973 Code. Thus, for Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 29/49 instance, orders summoning witnesses, adjourning cases, passing orders for bail, calling for reports and such other steps in aid of the pending proceeding, may no doubt amount to interlocutory orders against which no revision would lie under s. 397 (2) of the 1973 Code. But orders which are matters of moment and which affect or adjudicate the rights of the accused or a particular aspect of the trial cannot be said to be interlocutory order so as to be. outside the purview of the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court.
7. In Central Bank of India v. Gokal Chand(1) this Court while describing the incidents of an interlocutory order, observed as follows "In the context of s. 38(1), the words "every order of the Controller made under this Act", though very wide, do not include interlocutory orders, which are. merely procedural and do not affect the rights or liabilities of the parties. In a pending proceeding the Controller, may pass many interlocutory orders under ss. 36 and 37, such as orders regarding the summoning of witnesses, discovery, production and inspection of documents, issue of a commission for examination of witnesses, inspection of premises, fixing a date of hearing and the admissibility of a Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 30/49 document or the relevancy of a question. All these interlocutory orders are steps taken towards the final adjudication and for assisting the parties in the prosecution of their case in the pending proceeding; they regulate the procedure only 'and do not affect any right or liability of the parties." The aforesaid decision clearly illustrates the nature and incidents of 'an interlocutory order and the incidents given by this Court constitute sufficient guidelines to interpret the connotation of the. word "interlocutory order" as appearing in sub-s. (2) of s. 397 of the 1973 Code.
8. Similarly in a later case in Mohan Lal Magan Lal Thacker v. State of Gujarat (1968) 2 SCR 685: (AIR 1968 SC 733) this Court pointed out that the finality of an order could not be judged by co-relating that order with the controversy in the complaint. The fact that the controversy still remained alive was irrelevant. In that case this Court held that even though it was an interlocutory order, the order was a final order.
9. Similary in Baldevdas v. Filmistan Distributors (India) Pvt. Ltd., (AIR 1970 SC 406) while interpreting the import of the words "case decided"
appearing in S. 115 of the. Code of Civil Procedure, Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 31/49 this Court observed as follows:
"A case may be said to be decided, if the Court adjudicates for the purposes of the suit some right or obligation of the parties in controversy;" Apart from this it would appear that under the various provisions of the Letters Patent of the High Courts in India, an appeal lies to a Division Bench from an order passed by a Single Judge and some High Courts have held that even though the order may appear to be an interlocutory one where it does decide one of the aspect of the rights of the parties it is, appealable. For instance, an order of a Single Judge granting a temporary injunction was held by a Full Bench of Allahabad High Court in Standard Glass Beads Factory and Anr.v. Shri Dhar & Ors . AIR 1960 All 692, as not being an interlocutory order having decided some rights of the parties and was, therefore, appealable. To, the same, effect are the decisions of the Calcutta High Court in Union of India v. Khetra Mohan Banerjee AIR 1960 Cal 190, of the Lahore High Court in Gokal Chand v. Sanwal Das and others;AIR 1920 Lah 326 of the Delhi High Court in Begum Aftab Zamani v. Shri Lal Chand Khanna AIR 1969 Delhi 85 (FB) and of the Jammu & Kashmir High Court in Har Parshad Wali and Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 32/49 Anr. v. Naranjan Nath Matoo and others AIR 1959 J & K 139.
14. That means to say, the Hon'ble Apex Court not only dealt with the status of an interlocutory order, final order rather also invented a new terminology with regard to an order being interlocutory, but adjudicating the issue in its finality, as an intermediary order. The two Judges Bench Decision of Amar Nath Case has been subject to consideration in three Judges Bench decision of Madhu Limaye vs. State of Maharashtra reported in A.I.R. 1978 SC 47 (with some disapproval), wherein it has observed as follows:-
"7. For the reasons stated hereinafter we think that the statement of the law apropos point No.1 is not quite accurate and needs some modulation. But we are going to reaffirm the decision of the Court on the second point and gave its finding in following way:-
8. Under section 435 of the 1898 Code the High Court had the power to "call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court 'situate within the local limits of its jurisdiction for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed. and as to the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 33/49 regularity of any proceedings of such inferior Court", and then to pass the necessary orders in accordance with the law engrafted in any of the sections following section 435. Apart from the revisional power, the High Court possessed and possesses the inherent powers to be exercised ex debito justitiae to do the real and the substantial 'justice for the administration of which alone Courts exist. In express language this power was recognized and saved in section 561A of the old Code. Under section 397(1) of the 1973 Code, revisional power has been conferred on the High Court in terms which are identical to those found in section 435 of the 1898 Code. Similar is the position apropos the inherent powers of the High Court. We may read the language of section 482 (corresponding to section 561A of the old Code) of the, 1973 Code. It says:-
"Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice." At the outset the following principles may be noticed in relation to the exercise Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 34/49 of the inherent power of the High Court which have been followed ordinarily and generally, almost invariably, barring a few exceptions :- (1) That the power is not to be resorted to if there is a specific provision in the Code for the redress of the grievance of the aggrieved party ;
(2) That it should be exercised very sparingly to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice;
(3) That it should not be exercised as against the express bar of law engrafted in any other provision of the Code.
9. In most of the cases decided during several decades the inherent power of the High Court has been invoked for the quashing of a criminal proceeding on one ground or the other. Sometimes the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court has also been resorted to for the same kind of relief by challenging the order taking cognizance or issuing processes or framing charge on the grounds that the Court had no jurisdiction to take cognizance and proceed with the trial, that the issuance of process was wholly illegal or void, or that no charge could be framed as no offence was made out on the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 35/49 allegations made or the evidence adduced in Court.
In the background aforesaid we proceed to examine as to what is the correct position of law after the introduction of a provision like sub section (2) of section 397 in, the 1973 Code.
15. So far nature of order is concerned, on that very score, it has been held:-
"12. Ordinarily and generally the expression 'interlocutory order' has been understood and taken to mean as a converse of the term 'final order'. In volume 22 of the third edition of Halsbury's Laws of England at page 742, however, it has been stated in para 1606 "....... a judgment or order may be final for one purpose and interlocutory for another, or final as to part and interlocutory as to part. The meaning of two words must therefore be considered separately in relation to the particular purpose for which it is required." In para 1607 it is said :
"In general a judgment or order which determines the principal matter in question is termed "final"."
In para 1608 at pages 744 and 745 we find the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 36/49 words:
"An order which does not deal with the final rights of the parties, but either (1) is made before judgment, and gives no final decision on the matters in dispute, but is merely on a matter of procedure, or (2) is made after judgment, and merely directs how the declarations of right already given in the- final judgment are to be worked out, is termed "interlocutory". An interlocutory order, though not conclusive of the main dispute, may be conclusive as to the subordinate matter with which it deals."
13. In S. Kuppuswami Rao v. The King, 1947 FCR 180: (AIR 1949 FC Kania C. J., delivering the judgment of the Court has referred to some English decisions at pages 185 and 186 (of FCR) (at p.3 of AIR). Lord Esher M. R. said in Salaman v. Warner (1891) 1 QB 734 "If their decision, whichever way it is given, will, if it stands, finally dispose of the matter in dispute, I think that for the purposes of these rules it is final. On the other hand, if their decision, if given in one way, will finally dispose of the matter in dispute, but, if given in the other, will allow the action to go on, then I think it is not final, but interlocutory." To the same effect are the observations quoted from the judgments of Fry L. J. Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 37/49 and Lopes L. J. Applying the said test, almost on facts similar to the ones in the instant case, it was held that the order in revision passed by the High Court (at that time, there was no bar like section 397 (2) was not a "final order" within the meaning of section 205 (1) of the Government of India Act, 1935. It is to be noticed that the test laid down therein was that if the objection of the accused succeeded, the proceeding could have ended but not vice versa. The order can be said to be a final order only if, in either event, the action will be determined. In our opinion if this strict test were to be applied in interpreting the words 'interlocutory order" occurring in section 397(2), then the order taking cognizance of an offence by a Court, whether it is so done illegally or without jurisdiction, will not be a final order and hence will be an interlocutory one. Even so, as we have said above, the inherent power of the High Court can be invoked for quashing such a criminal proceeding. But in our judgment such an interpretation and the universal application of the principle that what is not a final order must be an interlocutory order is neither warranted nor justified If it were so it will render almost nugatory the revisional power of the Sessions Court or the High Court conferred on it by section Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 38/49 397(1). On such a 'strict interpretation, only those orders would be revisable which are orders passed on the final determination of the action but are not appealable under Chapter XXIX of the Code. This does not seem to be the intention of the Legislature when it retained the revisional power of the High Court in terms identical to the one in the, 1898 Code. In what cases then the High Court will examine the legality or the propriety of an order or the legality of any proceeding of an inferior Criminal court ? Is it circumscribed to examine only such proceeding which is brought for its examination after the final determination and wherein no appeal lies ? Such cases will be very few and far between. It has been pointed out repeatedly, vide, for example, The River Wear Commissioners v. William Adamson(1) and R. M. D. Chamarbaugwalla v. The Union of India ( 1957 SCR 930:) that although the word occurring in a particular statute are plain and unambiguous, they have to be interpreted in a manner which would fit in the context of the other provisions of the statute and bring about the real intention of the legislature. On the one hand, the legislature kept intact the revisional power of the High Court and, on the other, it put a bar on the exercise of that power in relation to any Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 39/49 interlocutory order. In such a situation it appears to us that the real intention of the legislature was not to equate the expression "interlocutory order" as invariably being converse of the words "final order". There may be an order passed during the course of a proceeding which may not be final in the sense noticed in Kuppuswami's case (supra), but, yet it may not be an interlocutory order-pure or simple. Some kinds of order may fall in between the two. By a rule of harmonious construction, we, think that the bar in sub-section (2) of section 397 is not meant to be attracted to such kinds of intermediate orders. They may not be final orders for the purposes of Article 134 of the Constitution, yet it would not be correct to characterise them as merely interlocutory orders within the meaning of section 397(2). It is neither advisable, nor possible, to make a catalogue of orders to demonstrate which kinds of orders would be merely, purely or simply interlocutory and which kinds of orders would be final, and then to prepare an exhaustive list of those types of orders which will fall in between the two. The first two kinds are well-known and can be culled out from many decided cases. We may, however, indicate that the type of order with which we are concerned in this case, even though it may not be final in one Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 40/49 sense, is surely not interlocutory so as to attract the bar of subsection (2) of section 397. In our opinion it must be taken to be an order of the type falling in the middle course.
14. In passing, for the sake of explaining ourselves, we may refer to what has been said by Kania C. J. in Kuppuswami's case (1947 FCR 180 at p. 187): (AIR 1949 FC 1 at p. 3) by quoting a few words from Sir George Lowndes in the case of Abdul Rahman V. D. K. Cassim and Sons(60 Ind App 76: (AIR 1933 PC 58). The learned law Lord said with reference to the order under consideration in that case : "The effect of the order from which it is here sought to appeal was not to dispose finally of the rights of the parties. It no doubt decided an important, and even a vital, issue in the case, but it left the suit alive, and provided for its trial in the ordinary way. Many a time a question arose in India as to what is the exact meaning of the phrase "case decided" occurring in section 1 1 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Some High Courts had taken the view that it meant the final order passed on final determination of the action. Many others had however, opined that even interlocutory orders were covered by the said term. This Court struck a mean and it did not approve of Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 41/49 either of the two extreme lines. In Baldevdas v. Filmistan Distributors (India) Pvt. Ltd .(AIR 1970 SC
406) it has been pointed out (at p. 410) :
"A case may be said to be decided, if the Court adjudicates for the purposes of the suit some right or obligation of the parties in controversy :"
We may give a clear example of an order in a civil case which may not be a final order within the meaning of Article 133 (1) of the Constitution, yet it will not be purely or simply of an interlocutory character. Suppose for example, a defendant raises the plea of jurisdiction of a particular Court to try the suit or the bar of limitation and succeeds, then the action is determined finally in that Court. But if the point is decided against him the suit proceeds. Of course, in a given case the point raised may be such that it is interwoven and interconnected with the other issues in the case, and that it may not be possible to decide it under Order 14 Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure as I preliminary point of law. But, if it is a pure point of law and is decided one way or the other, then the order deciding such a point may not be interlocutory, albeit-may not be final either. Surely, it will be a case decided, as pointed out by this Court in some decisions, within Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 42/49 the meaning of section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. We think it would be just and proper to apply the same kind of test for finding out the real meaning of the expression 'interlocutory order' occurring in section 397(2)."
16. In Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Private Limited and another v. Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2018) 16 SCC 299, discussing majority of the earlier judgments, the Apex Court properly identified the inherent power as embedded in the High Court in accordance with Section 482 Cr.P.C. as well as unbridled power falling under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and further, held that those powers are preserved without any infringement:-
"64. Insofar as petitions under Articles 226 and 227 are concerned, they form part of the basic structure of the Constitution as has been held in L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India and others, (1997) 3 SCC 261 at 301. Here again, the judgment of a Constitution Bench in Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab, (1994) 3 SCC 569 at 714, puts it very well when it says:
"368. ...(17) Though it cannot be said that the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain an application Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 43/49 for bail under Article 226 of the Constitution and pass orders either way, relating to the cases under the Act 1987, that power should be exercised sparingly, that too only in rare and appropriate cases in extreme circumstances. But the judicial discipline and comity of courts require that the High Courts should refrain from exercising the extraordinary jurisdiction in such matters."
This aspect of Kartar Singh (supra) has been followed in Girish Kumar Suneja ((2017) 14 SCC 809) in paragraph 40 thereof and we respectfully concur with the same. In view of the aforesaid discussion, it is clear that the Delhi High Court judgment's conclusions in paragraph 33 (a), (b) and (d) must be set aside."
17. In the aforesaid background, insisting or directing that the petition having been filed under the guise of Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be converted as an appeal in terms of Section 14A of the S.C./S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act will not tantamount to encroach upon the absoluteness of the High Court.
18. In likewise manner, the scope of Sub-section-3 also needs in depth scrutiny in the background of divergent view Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 44/49 in consonance with the forbidding clause. Furthermore, whether Sub-section-3 would be the subject of subversion in the background of relevant provisions of the Limitation Act guiding the issue coupled with the power of the High Court .
19. Similar issue was subject to consideration by the Full Bench of Allahabad High Court in Criminal Writ (Public Interest Litigation) No.08 of 2018 with Criminal Miscellaneous No.38755 of 2017 Satyendra and others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh with Criminal Writ (Public Interest Litigation) No.11 of 2018, Vishnu Behari Tiwari v. Union of India and others reported in 2018 CRI.L.J. 5010 and during consideration of the same, the Full Bench on its own framed, the following points for adjudication:-
A. Whether provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 14- A and the second proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 14-A of the Amending Act, are violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, being unjust, unreasonable and arbitrary?
B. Whether in view of the provisions contained in Section 14-A of the Amending Act, a petition under the provisions of Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India or a revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short Cr.P.C.) or a Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 45/49 petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is maintainable. OR in other words, whether by virtue of Section 14- A of the Amending Act, the powers of the High Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution or its revisional powers or the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stand ousted?
C. Whether the amended provisions of Section 14-A would apply to offences or proceedings initiated or pending prior to 26 January 2016?
D. Whether upon the expiry of the period of limitation for filing of an appeal as specified in the second proviso to Section 14-A (3), Section 439 Cr.P.C. and the powers conferred on the High Court in terms thereof would stand revived?
E. Whether the power to directly take cognizance of offences shall be exercisable by the existing Special Courts other then the Exclusive Special Courts or Special Courts to be specified under the amended Section 14?"
And answered one by one by concluding under Para-115 as follows:-
"115. In light of the above discussion, our answer to the Questions formulated are as follows:
A. Whether provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 14A and the second proviso to sub- section (3) of Section 14A of the Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 46/49 Amending Act, are violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution, being unjust, unreasonable and arbitrary? While we reject the challenge to section 14-A (2), we declare that the second proviso to Section 14A (3) is clearly violative of both Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. It is not just manifestly arbitrary, it has the direct and unhindered effect of taking away the salutary right of a first appeal which has been recognised to be an integral facet of fair procedure enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution. The absence of discretion in the Court to consider condonation of delay even where sufficient cause may exist renders the measure wholly capricious, irrational and excessive. It is consequently struck down. B. Whether in view of the provisions contained in Section 14A of the Amending Act, a petition under the provisions of Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India or a revision under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., is maintainable. OR in other words, whether by virtue of Section 14A of the Amending Act, the powers of the High Court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution or its revisional powers or the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stand ousted ? We therefore answer Question (B) by holding that 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 Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 47/49 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 subsection(1) of Section 14A would also include intermediate orders.
C. Whether the amended provisions of Section 14-A would apply to offences or proceedings initiated or pending prior to 26 January 2016?
We hold that the provisions of Section 14A would be applicable to all judgments, sentences or orders as well as orders granting or refusing bail passed or pronounced after 26 January, 2016. We further clarify that the introduction of this provision would not effect proceedings instituted or pending before this Court provided they relate to a judgment, sentence or order passed prior to 26 January 2016. The applicability of Section 14A does not depend upon the date of commission of the offence. The determinative factor would be the date of the order of the Special Court or Exclusive Court.
D. Whether upon the expiry of the period of limitation for filing of an appeal as specified in the second proviso to Section 14A (3), Section 439 Cr.P.C. and the powers conferred on the High Court in terms thereof would stand revived ?
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 48/49 We hold that the powers conferred on the High Court under Section 439 Cr.P.C. do not stand revived. We find ourselves unable to sustain the line of reasoning adopted by the learned Judge in Rohit that the provisions of Section 439 Cr.P.C. would remain in suspension during the period of 180 days and thereafter revive on its expiry. The conclusion so arrived at cannot be sustained on any known principle of statutory interpretation. We are therefore, constrained to hold that both Janardan Pandey as well as Rohit do not lay down the correct law and must, as we do, stand overruled. E. Whether the power to directly take cognizance of offences shall be exercisable by the existing Special Courts other than the Exclusive Special Courts or Special Courts to be specified under the amended Section 14?"
The existing Special Courts do not have the jurisdiction to directly take cognisance of offences under the 1989 Act. This power stands conferred only upon the Exclusive Special Courts to be established or the Special Courts to be specified in terms of the substituted section 14. However it is clarified that the substitution of Section 14 by the Amending Act does not have the effect of denuding the existing Special Courts of the authority to exercise jurisdiction in respect of proceedings under the 1989 Act. They would merely not have the power to directly take cognizance of offences and would be bound by the rigours of Section 193 Cr.P.C. Even if cognizance has been taken by Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.4792 of 2018(10) dt.08-04-2019 49/49 the existing Special Courts directly in light of the uncertainty which prevailed, this would not ipso facto render the proceedings void ab initio. Ultimately it would be for the objector to establish serious prejudice or a miscarriage of justice as held in Rati Ram (AIR 2012 SC 1485)."
20. Because of the fact that during course of consideration of aforesaid legal jugglery, the virus of Section 14A of the Act along with other relevant Sections would also be the major issue apart from difference of opinion as indicated above, therefore, the matter is required to be considered properly by the Division Bench and for that, questionnaire has been framed under Para-1 coupled with Para-19, and for that, office is directed to place before the Division Bench after taking permission from Hon'ble the Chief Justice.
(Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J) vikash/-
U T