The substantive law prevails over procedural law in case of a clash between the two statutory provisions.

ORDER :

1. This is a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure raising an important point with regard to applicability of the Indian Penal Code (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1991. The said Amending Act was enacted by the State of Andhra Pradesh exercising Legislative Powers under the concurrent list III of Schedule VII of the Constitution of India and taking assent of the President of India. The President has assented on 13-2-1991. Sub-Section (2) of Section 1 of the amending Act says that the Act will come into operation on issuance of notification. The notification in G.O.Ms. No. 165, Home (Courts-B) was published on 25th March 1992 to be effective from 1st April, 1992. The said notification is produced by Mr. T. Gopala Krishna, the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. Even though the Criminal Procedure Code specifies the Court of Sessions as the authority to try an offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code, the same has to yield to the substantive provision i.e., Indian Penal Code, as amended by the A.P. Act. No. 6 of 1991, which came into force with effect from 1-4-1992 while the offence was said to have been committed on 18-3-1992.

3. Wherever there is clash between the two statutory provisions, viz., one procedural and another substantive, the former has to give way to the latter, as the substantive law always prevails over the procedural law.

4. In the circumstances, the order of committal passed by the Court is quashed and the matter is remitted back to the Court of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of 1st Class, Parvathipuram, for trial and disposal according to law.

The Court of Sessions, Vijayanagaram, shall transmit the entire record to the said Magistrate's Court, Parvathipuram.

5. The Criminal Revision case is allowed to the extent indicated above.