Kin of Mecca Masjid blast moves Supreme Court challenging 90-day limitation to file appeal in NIA cases

Two relatives of a deceased in the 2007 Mecca Masjid bomb blast have approached the Supreme Court challenging Section 21(5) of the National Investigation Agency Act (NIA Act) which lays down limitation period for filing appeals under the Act [Osman Shareef and Anr. v Union of India and Ors.].The plea is an appeal against an April 2021 judgment of the Telangana High Court which had dismissed the petitioners' writ petition challenging the provision.Section 21(5) lays down a 30-day limitation period for filing appeals from the special NIA court to the High Court. The High Court can choose to entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that there was sufficient reason for delay in filing the appeal.However, no appeal can be entertained after a period of 90 days."The window of 90 days is too narrow to be considered reasonable and does not allow the right to a first appeal to be exercised in its true spirit....the provision violates Article 21 by placing an unreasonable restrictions on right of appeal," the plea filed through advocate Prasanna S said.A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh issued notice in the matter and tagged it with another criminal appeal..The petitioners, the father and wife of one of the victims of the Mecca bomb blast of 2007, had filed an appeal the against a 2018 judgment of the special NIA court acquitting five accused in the case. They filed appeal against the same after coming to know that the NIA had decided not to challenge the acquittal.However, before the High Court, the counsel for NIA objected to the appeal citing the 97-day delay in filing the appeal.The High Court dismissed the appeal since it was filed after the 90-day deadline prescribed by Section 21(5). Thereafter, they filed a writ petition before the High Court challenging the Constitutionality of Section 21(5) which came to be dismissed leading to the present plea before the top court. The plea said that the right to appeal in criminal proceedings is protected by Article 21 and any absolute restriction on the same is unconstitutional.In this regard, the plea relied on a full bench decision of the Allahabad High Court which found an identical provision of the Scheduled castes/Scheduled tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2015 to be unconstitutional.Section 21(5) provision violates Article 21 by placing an unreasonable restrictions on right of appeal, the plea said."A plain reading of the provision shows that the right to a first appeal against any Impugned Order or Judgement or sentence is entirely extinguished, when the 90 days period lapses/expires," it was submitted..In criminal proceedings, the right of first appeal finds its place well within the ambit of Article 21, the petitioner contended. "With reference to criminal appeals, the Supreme Court held in Babu Rajirao Shinde v. State of Maharashtra [(1971) 3 SCC 337] that a convicted person has the substantial right to at least one appeal, especially in serious cases," the petition said..Senior Counsel Nitya Ramakrishnan appeared for the petitioners..[Read Order]