NEERAJ Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been filed by the appellant which is actually an application for bail. The order passed by the learned Court below dismissing his application for grant of bail is dtd. 20/10/2020. The appellant was asked by this Court as to how he could prefer an appeal against the order dtd. 20/10/2020, when he has already challenged the validity of the said order in a previous appeal being criminal appeal number 4677/ 2021.

(2.) Learning counsel for the appellant submitted that it is settled law that there res judicata does not apply while deciding a subsequent application for bail irrespective of the result of the previous application. In this regard, the learned counsel for the appellant has placed before this Court copy of a judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in Criminal Appeal No. 1104/2021 by which the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh had an opportunity to deal with a similar situation in the case of Neeraj Jagatramka Vs. State of Chhattisgarh. In that case also, the Registry had taken an objection with regard to the maintainability of the criminal appeal as the order against which the appellant had approached the High Court stood exhausted by a previous order of the High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 642/2021 which was disposed of by the High Court vide order dtd. 11/08/2021.

(3.) While deciding the said question, the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh proceeded on the basis that res judicata is inapplicable to bail orders and cases relating to exercise of jurisdiction under Sec. 438 and 439 Cr.P.C. It relied upon the judgments of the Supreme Court also to arrive at such a conclusion. However, the issue that was not examined by the Hon'ble High Court of Chhattisgarh was whether the High Court, while examining an appeal under Sec. 14 (2) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (hereinafter, for the sake of brevity, is being referred to as the 'Special Act'), was exercising jurisdiction under Sec. 438 and 439 of the Cr.P.C as a Court of concurrent jurisdiction examining an original application for bail / anticipatory bail or, whether, it was acting as an appellate Court looking into the correctness of the order passed by the learned Court below allowing or denying bail to the accused. It is also to be examined whether, the High Court has authority to entertain an application under Sec. 438 or 439 directly, for an offence under the Special Act.