MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court bench of Justices Vinay Deshpande and Amit Borkar at the Nagpur seat on Wednesday held that all scheduled offences, which are crimes under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) will have to be dealt with exclusively by special NIA courts irrespective of the fact whether the crime is being probed by the NIA (central agency) or the state government agencies. The bench also held that an accused to challenge rejection of bail will have to approach the High Court under the NIA law and not under the provisions of the Criminal Code of Procedure (CrPC).
The bench pronounced the ruling while disposing of a petition filed by Surendra Gadling, one of the prime accused in the Bhima-Koregaon violence case. He challenged an October 2019 order passed by a sessions court in Pune denying him bail.
Gadling through senior counsel S P Dharmadhikari contended that only a special NIA court would have jurisdiction to deal with cases under UAPA law. He cited a three-bench judgment of the Supreme Court to substantiate his submissions. He argued that the NIA court will hear cases under UAPA irrespective of whether the offence is being investigated by the NIA or some other state agency.
On the other hand, additional public prosecutor V A Thakare argued that only cases which are being investigated by the NIA could be tried or dealt with by special NIA court and offence wherein state agencies are the prosecutors, then a sessions court can have jurisdiction. He cited a Supreme Court judgment pronounced by a division bench (two judges).
Having considered the contentions, the bench led by Justice Deshpande opined that it would have to go with the ruling pronounced by the three judges of the top court. "We therefore hold that all Scheduled Offences i.e. all offences under the UAPA, whether investigated by the National Investigation Agency or by the investigating agencies of the state government, are to be tried exclusively by Special Courts set up under that Act," the judge held.
Further, to the law point on whether an accused, whose bail is denied under the NIA law, could approach the High Courts under the CrPC, the bench held that if an accused if refused bail by a special court, s/he cannot approach the HCs under CrPC. The bench said the person would then have to invoke the provisions of NIA (section 21) which provide for a statutory appeal against any orders of a special court, within 30 days.
The bench accordingly disposed of Gadling's bail plea as he didn't approach it under NIA provisions but under CrPC.
