Patna High Court
MAHENDRA SHARMAversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- JITENDRA KUMAR
Holding
The appeal is dismissed as time‑barred under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act.
Summary
The appellants Mahendra Sharma, Jitan Sharma and Krishan Nandan Sharma appealed against a Special Judge's order dated 13 May 2022 that took cognizance of offences under the IPC and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The appeal was filed on 11 August 2022, i.e., 438 days after the impugned order. Under Section 14A of the SC/ST Act, an appeal must be filed within 90 days, and even with sufficient cause, cannot be entertained after 180 days. The court examined the statutory limitation period and found the appeal to be well beyond the 180‑day ceiling. Consequently, the appeal was held to be time‑barred and was dismissed. The decision underscores the strict adherence to limitation provisions in appeals under the SC/ST Act.
Issues considered
- Whether the appeal filed on 11 August 2022 is within the limitation period prescribed under Section 14A of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Legislation cited
- Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 341, 354, 448
- Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 — s. 14(1)(a), 14A
Subjects
- Limitation period
- Appeal
- SC/ST Act
- Time-barred
- Criminal procedure
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL APPEAL (SJ) No.5350 of 2023
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-74 Year-2018 Thana- SC/ST District- Purnia
======================================================
1. Mahendra Sharma @ Mahendra Mistri, Son Of Shanichar Sharma, R/O
Village- Sindhiya Basti, P.S.- Sadar, District- Purnea
2. Jitan Sharma @ Jitendar Kumar Sharma Son Of Mahendra Sharma @
Mahendra Mistri, R/O Village- Sindhiya Basti, P.S.- Sadar, District- Purnea
3. Krishan Nandan Sharma @ Krishnanand Sharma, Son Of Mahendra Sharma
@ Mahendra Mistri, R/O Village- Sindhiya Basti, P.S.- Sadar, District-
Purnea
... ... Appellant/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Meera Devi, Wife Of Ashok Paswan, R/O Village- Lakripatti, Gulabbagh,
P.S.- Sadar, District- Purnea
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Appellant/s : Mr. Nishant Kumar Sinha, Advocate.
For the State : Ms.Usha Kumari No. 1, Spl. P.P.
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
4 29-01-2026 The present Criminal Appeal (SJ) has been preferred
against the impugned order dated 13.05.2022 whereby learned
Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Purnea, has taken cognizance of
offence punishable under Sections 323, 341, 354, 448 of the
Indian Penal Code and Sections 3(i)(r)(s)(w)(i), 3(2)(va) of
SC/ST Act against the Appellants.
2. However, the present Appeal has been preferred
beyond the limitation period. As per Section 14A of SC/ST Act
1989, the Appeal can be preferred against any order passed by
learned Special Court, within 90 days. As per the proviso to
Patna High Court CR. APP (SJ) No.5350 of 2023(4) dt.29-01-2026
2/2
Section 14A, one can file Appeal beyond 90 days if he has
sufficient cause for not preferring the Appeal beyond the said
period of 90 days. There is further proviso to Section 14A of
the SC/ST Act that in any case, no Appeal shall be entertained
after expiry of 180 days.
3. In the case on hand, it transpires that the present
Appeal has been preferred much more after 180 days. The
impugned order has been passed on 13.05.2022 whereas this
Appeal has been preferred on 11.08.2022. It means Appeal has
been preferred after 438 days.
4. Hence, the present Appeal is time barred under
Section 14(1)(a) of the SC/ST Act.
5. Accordingly, the present Appeal is dismissed as
time barred.
(Jitendra Kumar, J)
S.Ali/-
U T
Checking your session…