IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 28TH JANUARY 2008 / 8TH MAGHA 1929 Crl.MC.No. 410 of 2008() ------------------------ SC.94/2004 of DISTRICT & SESSIONS COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: ACCUSED NOS. 5,7,9 & 10 ----------------------------------- 1. CHELLA @ SELVAM, S/O.PONNUSWAMY, PARAKKAVU, PUTHENPADOM, KOLLONGODE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. SIVAN, S/O.MAYAN, PARAKKODE, PUTHENPADOM, KOLLANGODE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 3. RAJU @ SABARI, S/O.KARUPPASWAMY, HARIJAN COLONY, PUTHENPADOM, KOLLANGODE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 4. JAYAPRAKASAN @ KARUNAN, S/O.KARUPPASWAMY, HARIJAN COLONY, PUTHENPADOM, KOLLANGODE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.P.M.RAFIQ RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = Crl.M.C.No.410 of 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 28th day of January, 2008 ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. The petitioners herein are accused Nos.5,7,9 & 10 in S.C.No.94/2004 pending before the Sessions Court, Palakkad, which is also a Special Court under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. 3. On 6.12.07, the learned Sessions Judge has already framed charge against the petitioners for offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 449, 506(ii), 324, 326, 307,302 read with 34 IPC and Section 3 read with Sections 25(i)(a)& (I-B)(a) of the Arms Act and Sections 3(I)(x) and 3 (2)(v) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 ( hereinafter referred to as the “Special Act”). Crl.M.C.No. 410 of 2008 2 4. The main grievance of the petitioners is that when even the Police charge does not accuse the petitioners (A5, A7,A9 and A10) of an offence punishable under the Special Act evidently for the reason that the petitioners also belong to Scheduled castes and therefore incapable of committing an offence under the Special Act, the Sessions Court has, overlooking this vital aspect, framed charge against the petitioners for an offence punishable under the Special Act as well. Yet another contention raised by the petitioners is that the 10th accused was a juvenile both on the date of commission of offence namely 10.7.2000 as well as on the date of commencement of the amendment to the Juvenile Justice ( Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. 5. If, as matter of fact, accused Nos.5,7,9 and 10 are members of the Scheduled Caste even according to the prosecution records, they cannot be charged for an offence punishable under the Special Act. Likewise, if 10th accused was a juvenile on the relevant date, he cannot be tried before the Sessions Court and that he will have to made over to the Juvenile Court for being dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the Juvenile Justice ( Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000. Crl.M.C.No. 410 of 2008 3 6. The petitioners are accordingly permitted to file a petition highlighting the above aspects before the trial court within two weeks from today and in case, such a petition is filed, the same shall be considered and the court charge amended accordingly and the 10th accused dealt with accordingly. This Crl.M.C is disposed of as above. V. RAMKUMAR, JUDGE sj