Union Of India Represented By Its vs Abdul Razaak

Headnote AI-drafted · Reviewed and approved

These criminal appeals were filed by the Union of India, represented by the National Investigation Agency (NIA), under Section 21(4) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008, challenging bail orders granted to accused persons A15 and A18 by the Special Judge for NIA Cases, Ponnamallee. The bail orders had been passed on the basis of a Division Bench judgment of the Madras High Court in Barakathullah vs. National Investigation Agency, which was subsequently set aside by the Supreme Court on 22.05.2024, necessitating the NIA to prefer the present appeals with delay.

A preliminary objection was raised by the respondents that the appeals were barred by limitation under Section 21(5) of the NIA Act, and that the prosecution, unlike the accused, could not seek condonation of delay. The appellant contended that the differential treatment between the accused and the prosecution in condoning delay under Section 21(5) of the NIA Act amounted to discrimination and caused prejudice to the interests of the State, and that if delay could be condoned for appeals preferred by the accused, the same benefit ought to be extended to the prosecution.

The Court examined the question whether the period of limitation under Section 21(5) of the NIA Act could be interpreted differently for the accused and the prosecution, and whether Section 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 would apply so as to enable condonation of delay in appeals filed by the prosecution under the NIA Act. The Court undertook an elaborate analysis of the legal position, including the right to appeal, constitutional considerations under Article 21, and the approach under other special enactments.

Catchwords: National Investigation Agency Act · limitation · condonation of delay · bail · prosecution appeal · accused · Section 21(5) NIA Act · Unlawful Activities Prevention Act · Section 29(2) Limitation Act · discrimination · right to appeal · Article 21 Constitution