GIRRAJ SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is filed by the applicants accused challenging an order dated 11/4/2000 passed by Special Judge, Guna in case No. 39/98 S.I. whereby the Special Judge has transferred the matter to the concerned Magistrate for proceeding with the committal proceedings. Counsel for applicants submits that the said order is illegal and contrary to law.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that a complaint was filed against the applicants accused for committing offence under Sections 302/34 and 3(1)(10) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Said compaint was registered as crime No. 1-9-1998. Challan was filed by the prosecution directly before the Sessions Court, Guna and was not committed to the said court according to the provisions of law. Apex Court in the case of Gangula Ashok and another v. State of AP has laid down that the cognizance of offence under the Atrocities Act cannot be taken by the Special Court without being committing to that court by the Magistrate and a complaint or charge-sheet cannot be straightway filed to the Special Court.

(3.) Counsel for the applicant has also relied on the judgment of Apex court in the case of Moly v. State of MP, in which apex court relying the case of Gongula Ashok (supra) has taken the same view. Counsel for applicant, therefore, submits that the procedure adopted by the prosecution in filing straightway Challan before the Sessions Court is illegal and infact the prosecution be directed to file Challan papers before the concerning Magistrate who in turn after following the procedure may commit the matter to the Special Judge. The direction of the Special Judge to transfer the case to the concerned Magistrate for committal proceedings is illegal and contrary to the judgment of apex court referred above.