SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2015 Supreme(AP) 765

C.PRAVEEN KUMAR
State of A. P. – Appellant
Versus
Mangali Yadagiri – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Public Prosecutor.
For the Respondents: Palle Sriharinath, Counsel.

ORDER :

C. Praveen Kumar, J.

1. The I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak, invested with the power to try offences under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (hereinafter referred to as POSCO Act) made a reference under Section 395 (2) Cr.P.C. seeking clarification as to the jurisdiction of the Court to try the case when the offences alleged against the accused are triable under two legislations i.e. POSCO Act and Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (herein after referred to as SC/ST Act) in view of Section 14 of the SC/ST Act and Section 42-A of the POSCO Act. The facts in issue are as under:

"The informant/victim girl, who was aged about 14 years at the time of incident, belonging to Scheduled Caste, lodged a report before the police on 03.05.2013 stating that the accused, who belongs to a caste other than scheduled caste or scheduled tribe, assaulted and used criminal force on her with a dishonest intention to outrage her modesty within public view. In respect of the above incident, a case in Crime No. 39 of 2013 of Kowdipally Police Station came to be registered for the offences punishable under Section 354 (A)





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top