JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Mr. Y.P. Gupta, learned CGC for the petitioner and Ms. V. Suokhrie, learned P.P. for the State espondent.

2. This criminal revision petition has been filed by the petitioner under section 401 read with section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, assailing the order dated 01/04/2021 passed by learned Special Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Dimapur, Nagaland, rejecting the application dated 01/03/2021 filed by the Deputy Inspector General, Headquarters 6 Sector Assam Rifles to handover Number G/5012761M Riflemen (General Duty) Kush Kumar of 41 Assam Rifles (hereafter called the accused) who was apprehend by the Police in connection with Dimapur Women P.S Case No.03/2021 (corresponding to G.R Case No. 115/2021) under section 354 IPC r/w section 10 POCSO Act.

3. The case in brief is that on 26/02/2021, the accused who was on duty for the Road Opening Party (ROP) near Govt. Middle School Jharnapani, Ghashpani, Dimapur molested the victim, a student of Class-VII of the Govt. Middle School Jharnapani in the school compound by taking the photograph of the victim and firmly pressing the breast of the victim child with sexual intent.

4. The victim on 26/02/2021 accordingly filed the complaint with the Officer-in-Charge, Women Police Cell Dimapur, Nagaland and consequent to which the Case No. 03/2021 was registered against the accused under section 354 IPC r/w section 10 POCSO Act. The case has been charge-sheeted and is pending trial before the Special Judge, Fast Track Special Court, Dimapur, Nagaland. The accused is presently on bail on medical ground.

5. When the case was thus situated, the Deputy Inspector General, Headquarter 6 Sector Assam Rifles submitted the petition dated 01/03/2021 to the learned Special Judge, POCSO, to handover the accused to the Commanding Officer, 41 Assam Rifles, for trial of the accused by the Assam Rifles Court in accordance with law.

6. The learned Special Judge however by the order dated 01/04/2021 rejected the petition on the ground that the Assam Rifles Court is an ordinary criminal court not vested with the Special powers to try the offences under the POCSO Act.

7. Mr. Y.P. Gupta, learned CGC refers to section 55, 56 and 102 of the Assam Rifles Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred as Act, 2006) as well as to section 475 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and submits that a conjoint reading of the said provisions of law makes it clear that since the Assam Rifles authorities had exercised their option to try the accused, it is the General Assam Rifles Court (GARC) constituted under section 86 of the Act, 2006 which has the competence and the jurisdiction to try the case against the accused who has been charged for civil offences under section 356 IPC and section 10 of the POCSO Act, 2012. The learned CGC accordingly submits that the order dated 01/04/2021 passed by the learned Special Court rejecting the petition of the Assam Rifles Authorities is erroneous and against the law.

8. In support of his submission, the learned CGC has referred to the case of Ex. Lnk Mirgane Saudagar Navnath -versus- Union of India & Others decided by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Office, Guwahati on 12/06/2018 in OA(A)- 56/2016 and also the case of Ex. No. 14863424H Rank- Sepoy/Driver (Mechanical Transport) Suraj Singh decided by the learned Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Lucknow on 19/07/2018 in OA(A)128 of 2017 to contend that since the General Courts- Martial (GCM) and the Summary General Courts- Marital (SGCM) constituted under the Army Act, 1950, has been held to have the jurisdiction to try offences under the POCSO Act, 2012, the Assam Rifles Court constituted under the Act, 2006 to try the Assam Rifles, an armed forces of the Union, cannot be made an exception. The learned CGC has also relied in the case of Union of India represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs and Others -versus- Ranjit Kumar Saha & Another, reported in (2019) 7 SCC 505 to buttress the po