AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J. - (1.) ALL the three applications, are taken of together as the petitioners in all the applications have been arrayed as accused in Complaint Case No. 865 of 2001 instituted by Kaushalya Devi, opposite party No. 2. The petitioners, in all the three applications, have challenged the order taking cognizance, dated 2.2.2002, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih by which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and 3 (i) (x) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, (herein after referred to as the "Act") after finding a prima facie case against the petitioners.
(2.) THE complaint case as would appear from the complaint petition, which is made Annexure -1 to this application is that the complainant who is the member of Scheduled Tribes and is a poor married lady. It is said that one of the accused persons Bishwanath Sao (Cr. MP No. 731/2003) has implicated the husband of the complainant in a false case of dacoity for which he is in jail. It is said that when complainant had gone to attend the call of nature, the petitioner Bajo Sao (Cr. MP No. 730/2003) suddenly appeared and thereafter he tried to commit rape on her. When the complainant started raising hulla, Bajo Sao started fleeing away from there and thereafter the complainant started chasing him. it is said that Bishwasnath Sao, Bajo Sao, Sibu Sao, Kailu Sao and Sudhir Sao started abusing the complainant in filthy language and assaulted her and Bajo Sao was telling the complainant by using the words shali dusadhin ko jan se mar do. Subsequently on 21.7.2001 the aforesaid complaint case was registered in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Giridih. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate after considering the averments made in the complaint petition, statements of the complainant on solemn affirmation, and also considering the statement of the witnesses examined during the enquiry under Section 202, Cr PC, took cognizance of the offence against the petitioners as aforesaid.
(3.) MR . A.K. Kashyap learned counsel for the petitioners, in all the applications, firstly raised a point that the order taking cognizance under Section 3 of the said Act is illegal because under the said Act only Special Judge is empowered to take cognizance and try the offence.;