The provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 override the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

( 1 ) THESE revision petitions are disposed of by this common order since the question of law involved in all of them is the same. The original order shall be kept in the record and proceedings in criminal Revision Petition No. 114 of 1993, whereas a copy thereof shall be retained in each of the record and proceedings in criminal Revision Petitions Nos. 586, 587 and 588 of 1994. Facts in Cr. R. P. No. 114 of 1993

( 2 ) THIS Criminal Revision Petition is directed against the order dated 23-12-1992 made by the learned Presiding Officer, special Court, Raichur ("the learned trial Judge" for short), in special Atrocities C. C. No. 11 of 1991. Under the order impugned, the learned trial Judge has held that the only offence he could try under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ("the Act" for short), would be the one punishable under Sections 3 (l) (xii) and 3 (2) (v) of the Act. In that view of the matter, he has altered the Charges framed against the respondent both under Sections 312, 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3 (1) (xii) and 3 (2) (v) of the Act by omitting the charges framed for the offences punishable under Sections, 312 and 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal Code and retaining the Charges framed under the Act as indicated earlier.

( 3 ) THE State of Karnataka, feeling aggrieved by the order, has presented this Criminal Revision Petition.

( 4 ) ACCORDING to the prosecution, on 8-10-1990 at about 8-00 AM, in the limits of Village: Ooti, Nagappa, the respondent (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused'), attempted to commit rape on a woman, by name, Yellamma, belonging to Scheduled caste. According further to the prosecution, on that day at 8-00 am, the accused held Yellamma on the cart track line in the field of Huttigi Marad and with a view to commit rape, sat on her stomach and attempted to commit rape. Yellamma was pregnant at that time. She made attempts to escape from the clutches of the accused. The accused, with a view to obstruct her attempts successfully and attempt to commit rape, kicked on her stomach. Miscarriage was caused as a result of the assault.

( 5 ) ON the basis of the complaint lodged by Yellamma in the Police Station at Jalhalli in Raichur District, a case came to be registered against the accused in Crime No. 48 of 1990 for the offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (l) (xii) of the Act. On completion of investigation, the Police forwarded the accused to the Special Court constituted under Section 14 of the Act for inquiry and trial of the offences punishable under Section 376 read with Sections 511 and 313 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 3 (1) (xii) and 3 (2) (v) of the Act.

( 6 ) THE learned trial Judge, after hearing both the sides, framed Charges against the accused for the offences stated earlier.

( 7 ) THE case had stood posted for trial. The accused made an application under Section 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("the Code" for short), on the ground that the Special Court had only the power and jurisdiction to try the offences punishable under the Act that without a valid order of commitment, the Special Court could not have taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 312 and 376 of the indian Penal Code and that therefore, the charges framed for the said offences had to be deleted.

( 8 ) THE State of Karnataka opposed the motion. The learned trial Judge, after hearing both the sides, held that the Charges framed against the accused for the offences punishable under sections 312 and 376 read with Section 511 of the Indian Penal code, were liable to be deleted.

( 9 ) THE learned trial Judge, dealing with the definition clause, the various offences mentioned in Section 3 (1) of the Act and the provisions contained in Sections 18 and 20 of the Act, concluded that the only offences which in t