( 1 ) THE Division Bench of this Court consisting of both of us had an occasion to deliver judgment in Cri. R. C. No. 905 of 1996 dated 23-4-1999 in Referring Officer v. Shekar Nair, (1999 (3) ALT 533 : (1999 Cri LJ 4173 ). In the said Cri. R. C. the question was decided by this Court as to what procedure is to be followed in cases wherein the accused are charged of an offence punishable under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).

( 2 ) THIS reference was answered by this Court and while answering the reference, various judgments of different High Courts and also the judgments of the Full Bench of Kerala High Court were taken into consideration. We dissented from the view taken by Kerala High Court and we observed that the charge-sheets are liable to be returned for filing the same before the Court of concerned Magistrate of First Class for securing the committal of the accused to the Court of Session constituted as Special Court under the Act. One more aspect clarified was that the atrocities punishable under Section 3 of the Act as well as the offences under I. P. C committed in the course of the same transaction can be tried by the Special Court in the same trial subject to the committal by the Magistrate. It may be mentioned that the said decision was approved by the Supreme Court recently in Gangula Ashok v. State of A. P. , 2000 (1) JT (SC) 379 : (2000 Cri LJ 819 ).

( 3 ) AFTER the said decision, the Sessions Judges have entertained doubts and sought for clarifications/instructions of the High Court on the points mentioned by them. On the orders of the learned Chief Justice, they were treated as Reference Cases under Section 395 (2), Cr. P. C. That is how the cases are placed before us again. Cri M. P. No. 4161 of 1999 :

( 4 ) THIS reference is at the instance of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Srika-kulam. We are now answering the questions referred to this Court under Section 395 (2), Cr. P. C. in seriatim. (1) Whether the Judicial Magistrate of First Class may assign Calendar Case number to a charge-sheet or a complaint if cognizance is taken of an offence punishable under the S. C. and S. T. (PA) Act, 1989 and triable in accordance with the warrant procedure prescribed in the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 or he has to assign preliminary register case number even though any of the offences is not punishable with more than seven years imprisonment as stated in Part-II of the Scheduled-I to the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.

( 5 ) OUR answer to this question is as under : it is evident from S. C. and S. T. (PA) Act, 1989 that the offence involved under the said Act has to be dealt with by the Sessions Court, which is empowered under Section 14 of the Act with the powers under S. C. and S. T. (PA) Act, 1989. When the charge-sheet is filed in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class having territorial jurisdiction, the Magistrate has to number the case as P. R. C. because of the fact that Magistrate has no jurisdiction to try the case. He has to commit such case to the Special Court and other offences arising under IPC as a part of the same incident. The S. C. and S. T. (PA) Act does not make any difference as to what sentence is provided for different acts committed by the accused under the said Act. All the offences are to be tried by the Special Court and, therefore, such case has to be numbered as P. R. C. Case. As a matter of fact, the nomenclature - the Calendar case and P. R. C. Case are given under the provisions of Criminal Rules of Practice just to identify the cases which are triable by the Magistrate and which cases are to be committed for trial. Therefore, there is no reason to attach much importance to such nomenclature.

( 6 ) THE second question is as under : (2) If a case is registered as a calendar case, whether such case can be committed under Section 209 (a) Cr. P. C. to the Special Sessions Court