(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment of the Special Court (Court of Sessions), whereby the accused-respondents have been acquitted of the charges leveled against them under Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
(2.) THE prosecution version is that the accused persons are Brahmin by caste, whereas complainant Mathru Ram belongs to the Scheduled Caste. They all belong to the same village. It is alleged that on 21.4.1995 when Mathru Ram wanted to take water from the village 'Bowri' Shyam Lal and Nand Lal accused instigated the other accused to stop Mathru Ram to take water from the 'Bowri'. Mathru Ram was prevented from taking water from the 'Bowri' only on the ground that he belongs to the Scheduled Caste. Later Mathru Ram returned and forcibly took water from the 'Bowri'. Thereafter, the accused persons put cow dung in the 'Bowri' so as to defile the water. On 4.5.1995 Mathru Ram sent a complaint to the District Magistrate, Bilaspur. The police investigated the case and after completion of the investigation, the police first presented the challan in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghumarwin. The Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghumarwin vide order dated 11.4.1996 came to the conclusion that the case was triable by the Special Court i.e. the Court of Sessions and that he had no jurisdiction to entertain the challan against the accused. He therefore, directed that the challan be returned for presentation before the competent Court.
(3.) THE Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gangula Ashok and another Vs. State of A.P. [(2000) 2 SCC 504] and Vidyadharan Vs. State of Kerala, [(2004) 1 SCC 215] has held that a Sessions Court, specifically designated for the purpose of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, cannot take cognizance of an offence under the Act, unless the case is committed to it by the concerned Judicial Magistrate.