DISTRICT AND SESSION JUDGE Vs. C SRINIVAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a case referred to this Court by the learned District and Sessions Judge at Mahabubnagar, under Section 395(2) of Cr.P.C seeking necessary instructions and clarification as to whether Sessions Case Nos.37 and 53 of 2001 sent by the Additional Sessions Judge-cum- Special Judge for Trial of Cases under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Mahabubnagar, for registering them as regular Sessions Cases, as no offence was made out under Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (for short "the Act"), can be registered by the regular Sessions Court or not.

(2.) The above two Cases were committed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mahabubnagar, directly to the Court of Special Judge for Trial of Cases under the Act, Mahabubnagar, and they were registered as Sessions Cases by the Court. Since it was found that the offence under Section 3(lXxi) of the Act was not made out, the Special Judge for Trial of Cases under the Act sent the cases to the District and Sessions Court, for registering them as regular Sessions Cases.

(3.) In this revision, Sri C. V. Nagarjuna Reddy, appearing for the High Court, placed reliance on the judgment reported in State of Himachal Pradesh v. Gita Ram, 2000 (7) SCC 452, wherein the Supreme Court held that even after specification of a Sessions Court as a Special Court under the Act, the Special Court would continue to be the Sessions Court and the trial before that Court can be held only in accordance with the provisions contained in Chapter XVIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Supreme Court while dealing with the above matter relied upon its earlier decision in Gangula Ashok v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 2000 (1) ALD (Crl.) 519 (SC) = 2000 (2) SCC 504, wherein it was held as under: