The legislative intent behind enacting the special legislation and the requirement for the trial court to commit the case to the competent court.

JUDGMENT :

PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, J.

1. This Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A (1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act of 1989’) has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

“It is therefore most humbly and respectfully prayed that this Criminal Appeal may kindly be allowed and the order dated 26.08.2020 may kindly be quashed and set aside (Annexure-1) and the learned Special Court may kindly be directed to take cognizance of the offence and proceed as per law to the trial.”

2. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by the learned counsel for the appellant, are that the appellant filed a complaint against the private respondents before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banswara on 06.07.2011, alleging therein that the appellant was having agricultural lands in Khasra Nos. 1487/992, 1489/992 and 1490/992 in Sundanpur village, District Banswara and accused/respondents no. 2 to 7- trespassed on the said lands of the appellant on 03.07.2011 and that they hurled caste-based abuses against the appellant's mother and sister. And that the accused-respondents no. 2 to 7 forcefully dispossessed the appellant from his lands. Upon receipt of such complaint, the learned Magistrate forwarded the same under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. to Police Station Sadar, Banswara, and directed the police to conduct the necessary investigation.

2.1. Thereafter, an FIR, bearing No. 189/2011 was registered before the Police Station Sadar, Banswara under Sections 147, 447 and 427 of IPC, and Section 3 (1)(iv)(v)(x) of the Act of 1989.

2.2. Thereafter, the concerned police authorities conducted the investigation, and filed a Negative Final Report/Closure Report bearing No. 39/2013 dated 31.07.2011, before the learned Magistrate, whereupon the appellant submitted a protest petition against the said report, and thereafter, the learned Magistrate vide order dated 08.04.2015, took cognizance against the accused-respondents no. 2 to 7, under Sections 147, 447, 427, read with Section 149 of IPC and Section 3 (iv), (v) of the Act of 1989.

2.3. Being aggrieved by the aforementioned cognizance order, the accused-respondents no. 2 to 7 filed a revision before the learned revisional court, and vide the impugned order dated 26.08.2020, the said revision was partly allowed, and while quashing and setting aside the cognizance order dated 08.04.2015, the matter was remanded to back the learned Magistrate, for hearing the same afresh.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the impugned order passed by the learned revisional court is unsustainable in the eye of law, as it runs contrary to the law and against the very object behind enactment of the Act of 1989, as a special legislation.

3.1 It was further submitted that for the purpose of taking cognizance under the Act of 1989, the Union Legislature conferred certain powers upon the Special Courts, vide the amendments made under the said Act of 1989 and more particularly, the amendment incorporated in Sections 14 and 14-A of the said Act, w.e.f. 26.01.2016.

The said Sections 14 and 14-A of the SC/ST Act, as stand after the amendment, read as under:

“14. Special Court and Exclusive Special Court:

(1) For the purpose of providing for speedy trial, the State Government shall, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, by notification in the Official Gazette, establish an Exclusive Special Court for one or more Districts:

Provided that in Districts where less number of cases under this Act is recorded, the State Government shall, with the concurrence of the Chief Justice of the High Court, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify for such Districts, the Court of Session to be a Special Court to try the offences under this Act:

Provided further that the Courts so established or specified shall have power to directly take cognizance of offences under this Act.

(2) It shall be the duty of the State