JUDGMENT :

Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan, J.

Heard Ms. Pratibha Jaiswal, learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State only on the question of maintainability and jurisdiction of this Court and perused the record.

2. The instant appeal under Section 14-A (1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been filed by the appellants, Rajendra Vishwakarma @ Rajendra Sharma and Kunti Devi with the prayer to quash the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 6.1.2023 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sonbhadra, impugned charge sheet dated 20.12.2022 as well as entire proceeding of Session Case No. 12 of 2023 (State Vs. Pradeep Kumar Vishwakarma), arising out of Case Crime No. 130 of 2022, under Sections 147, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3(2)5 Ka & 3(1)Da & Dha of SC/ST Act, Police Station Pipri, District Sonbhadra, pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sonbhadra.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants in this case are challenging the cognizance taken/ summoning order passed by the Additional Session Judge/ Special Judge POCSO Act of date 6.1.2023 passed on the charge sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer under the relevant provisions of the SC/ST Act and relevant provisions of POCSO Act.

4. Learned AGA at the outset submits that summoning order passed by the Special Court constituted under POCSO Act may not be challenged by filing an appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act and the remedy which is available to the appellants is by challenging the summoning order by taking recourse to any other remedy available to them under the law. Having heard learned counsel for the parties the question which falls for consideration of this Court is when the charge sheet has been filed under the provisions of the Protection of Children from the Sexual Offences, Act 2012 (herein after called 'POCSO Act') as well as under the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (herein after referred to as the SC/ST Act) and the cognizance has been taken by the Special Court constituted under the POCSO Act and the accused persons have been summoned, whether an appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act would lie or the accused persons may take remedy having regard to the normal procedure provided under Cr.P.C., to challenge the summoning order passed by Special Court constituted under POCSO Act.

5. While considering the legal issue raised before this Court, it is to be borne in mind that if the provisions of POCSO Act would prevail then the appellants are entitled to challenge the summoning order passed by Special Court constituted under POCSO Act by adopting normal course and the procedure provided in the Code of Criminal Procedure and if the provisions of SC/ST Act would prevail then the summoning order passed may only be challenged by filing an appeal under Section 14-A of the SC/ST Act.

6. A perusal of the SC/ST Act and POCSO Act would reveal that the SC/ST Act is enacted on 30.1.1990 while the POCSO Act was enacted on 19.6.2012. Section 20 of the SC/ST Act deals with overriding effect of the said statute, while Section 42 A of the POCSO Act introduced with effect from 3.2.2013 refers to the overriding effect of that statute. Section 31 of the POCSO Act provides for application of the Cr.P.C. Thus both statutes have provisions which provides an overriding effect.

7. The above provisions for ready reference are mentioned below:-

Section 31 of the POCSO Act is as below:

"Section 31. Application of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to proceedings before a Special Court. - Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) (including the provisions as to bail and bonds) shall apply to the proceedings before a Special Court and for the purposes of the said provisions, the