AYAZ AHMAD Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the appeal on hand the appellants have challenged the order of framing charge dtd. 25/10/2019 as also the order dtd. 26/8/2022 whereby the request of the appellants for alteration of the charge has been rejected. The appeal is preferred under Sec. 21 of the National Investigating Agency Act, 2008, ( NIA Act for short ). Mr. Rahul Sharma appearing for the respondent has raised a preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the appeal on the ground that, in terms of Sec. 21 of the NIA Act, the interlocutory orders passed by the Special Judge are not appealable and that the order of framing of charge or refusing to alter the charge are interlocutory in nature and, therefore, not appealable.

(2.) Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the scheme of the NIA Act, we deem it necessary to first set out Sec. 21 of the NIA Act, which reads thus:-

(3.) From plain reading of Sec. 21, it would transpire that the Sec. begins with a non-obstante clause i.e. "Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code" which would mean that any provision contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure which is not consistent with the provisions of Sec. 21 of the NIA Act, will give way and the provisions of Sec. 21 shall prevail and have over-riding effect. Insofar as the order of framing charge is concerned, same is already held to be not an interlocutory but an intermediate order in terms of the expression 'the interlocutory order' used in Sec. 397 (2) Cr.P.C.