NIA Act- It Would Be A Traversity Of Justice If A Convict's Appeal Is Not Heard On Merits On Account Of Bar Of Limitation: Delhi HC [Read Judgment]

In a significant judgment upholding rights of accused especially the right to liberty, Delhi High Court allowed the application of an accused person namely Farhan Sheikh while condoning the delay in filing and re-filing the appeal saying appellant has shown "sufficient cause" for the delay. Bench of Justice Vipan Sanghi and Justice I.S.Mehta while passing the judgment noted that they are dealing with the right of an accused/ convict, whose personal liberty stands curtailed by the conviction and the impugned order on sentence passed by the Special Court and in their view, it would lead to the travesty of justice if the appellant's substantive appeal is not heard on merits, and is rejected at the threshold only on account of bar of limitation prescribed under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act, particularly, when the appellant has moved the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. The provision of appeal – both on facts and law, under Section 21 of the NIA Act, is an integral part of fundamental fairness or procedure". Application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act to Section 21 of the NIA Act cannot be excluded Court considering the question whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act is, by necessary implication, excluded from application of Section 21 of the NIA Act said that on examination of the issue as to whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act can be invoked while belatedly preferring an appeal under Section 21 of the NIA Act, in the context that the right of appeal of an accused/ convict is a substantive right; is a facet of right of fair trial and substantive due procedure, and; is a right which is protected by Article 21 of the Constitution, the only conclusion that it can draw is that application of Section 5 of the Limitation Act to Section 21 of the NIA Act cannot be excluded. "Even if, the Act is considered to be complete Code in so far as it provides the right of appeal, in the light of the aforesaid discussion, we are inclined to hold that the prescription of limitation in Section 21 of the NIA Act is directory and not mandatory and that the High Court is empowered to entertain and consider application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay in filing the appeal.