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) (1) (i) IPC, Section 2 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2013, Section 8 of POSCO Act and Section 3 (1) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (herein after referred to as SC/ST Act). The police investigated into the matter and filed a charge sheet which was taken on file as P.R.C. No. 22 of 2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate, Narsapur, Medak District, for the above mentioned offences. Thereafter, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Special Court for trial of offences under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act-cum-V Additional Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy. The special Judge sent the case records to the Court of I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, on the point of jurisdiction since it involves an offence punishable under POSCO Act."

2. Thereafter, the learned I Additional District and Sessions Judge, Medak at Sangareddy, through his letter in Dis. No. 536, dated 22.05.2014, made a reference under Section 395 (2) Cr.P.C., seeking necessary clarification from this Court.

3. Heard learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and learned counsel appearing for the accused.

4. As seen from the facts of the case, an offence under POSCO Act was committed against a child, who was a member of Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe. In such a case, the issue that stems out for consideration is whether the said case should be tried by a Special Court constituted under SC/ST Act or by a Special Court constituted under POSCO Act.

5. The POSCO Act, which came into force from 14.11.2012, was enacted with a view to protect the children from offences of sexual assault, sexual harassment and pornography and to provide for establishment of Special Courts for trial of such offences and matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. This Act is a children friendly Act providing a special procedure for dealing with the offences relating to the children.

6. Sections 25 and 26 of the POSCO Act deal with the procedure to be followed by the Magistrate for recording the statements of the children under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

7. Section 28 of the POSCO Act deals with Designation of Special Courts, which reads as under:

"28. Designation of Special Courts. (1) For the purposes of providing a speedy trial, the State Government shall in consultation with the Chief Justice of the High Court, by notification in the Official Gazette, designate for each district, a Court of Session to be a Special Court to try the offences under the Act.

Provided that if a Court of Session is notified as a Children Court under the Commissions for Protection of Child Rights Act, 2005 or a Special Court designated for similar purposes under any other law for the ti