Should Plea Against Sessions Court Order Denying Bail Under UAPA Be Placed Before Division Bench?: Madras HC Refers Question To Larger Bench
Live LawThe Madras High Court recently referred to a larger bench the question whether an application against the order passed by a Sessions Court under the Unlawful Activities Act should be placed before a Single Judge or before a Division Bench of the High Court. The Government Advocate had opposed the plea on the ground that the single-Bench is not competent to hear the application inasmuch Section 21 ) of the NIA Act provides that only an appeal shall lie from any judgment, sentence or order, of a Special Court to the Hight Court, and the said appeal has to be heard by a bench of two Judges of the High Court. 223/2017, another Single Bench of the Madras High Court had held that Section 21 of the NIA Act will not be applicable and only the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code alone will apply and thereby the petition filed against the order passed by the District Court in matters concerning UAP Act can be heard by a Single Judge. He has referred the following questions: i)whether an application against the order passed by the District and Sessions Judge in a matter concerning UAP Act shall be numbered as a bail application or an appeal ii)whether, it has to be posted before the Single Judge or a two Judges Bench of this Court.