THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTI CE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY WRI T PETI TI ON No.34419 of 2023

ORDER

This Writ Petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is filed by the petitioners, seeking the following relief:

“……to issue an appropriate Writ, Order or Direction, more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the Respondent No.2 herein in not considering the application dated: 11.12.2023 seeking appointment of Special Public Prosecutor to prosecute the criminal proceedings in SC.No.212/2018 in Crime No.650/2017 on the file of Hon'ble Special SC/ST Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar being a victim of atrocity under SC/ST Act of 1989 as being illegal, arbitrary, discriminatory and violation of Articles.14, 21 of the Constitution of India and as well the rules under the Act…”

2.

It is the case of the petitioners that she is the victim and complainant in Crime No.650/2017 registered for the offences under sections 376 IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015 (for short “SC & ST (POA) Act”) and after completion of investigation charge sheet was laid and the same was taken cognizance as S.C.No.212/2018 on the file of Sessions Court for trial of SC/ST Cases, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.

3.

The learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the Government while exercising the powers conferred under Section 23(1) of SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989 has framed the Rules commonly called as “Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995” (for short “Rules, 1995”) and as per Rule 4(4) of the Rules, 1995, the District Magistrate and the officer-in-charge of the prosecution at the District level, shall review the position of cases registered under the Act and submit a monthly report on or before 20^th day of each subsequent month to the Director of Prosecution and the State Government. This report shall specify the action taken/proposed to be taken in respect of investigation and prosecution of each case. Further, as per Rule 4(5) of the Rules, 1995, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1) the District Magistrate or the Sub- Divisional Magistrate may, if deem necessary, or if so desired by the victims of atrocity engage an eminent Senior Advocate for conducting cases in the Special Courts on such payment of fee as he may consider appropriate. As per Rule 4(6) of Rules, 1995, payment of fee to the Special Public Prosecutor shall be fixed by the State Government on a scale higher than other panel advocates in the State. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that even though the petitioner has submitted a representation dated 11.12.2023 on the file of respondent No.2 requesting for appointment of Special Public Prosecutor to prosecute the S.C.No.212/2018 on the file of Sessions Court for trial of SC & ST cases in Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, the respondent No.2 is not acting upon the said representation as per the SC & ST (POA) Act and the Rules framed thereunder.

4.

Inspite of granting sufficient time for filing counter affidavit, till date, the respondents have not chosen to file counter affidavit opposing the prayer sought for in the writ petition. Further, keeping in view the object sought to be achieved by the enactment and the powers being conferred on the District Magistrate under Rule 4 of the Rules, 1995, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the respondent No.2 to examine the representation dated 11.02.2023 submitted by the petitioner and take necessary steps for appointment of Special Public Prosecutor in S.C.No.212/2018 on the file of Sessions Court for trial of SC & ST cases in Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, in accordance with law, within a period of four(4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.

With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of.

As a sequel, the miscellaneous petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed.