Cognizance under SC/ST Act is impermissible against persons belonging to Scheduled Castes.

The appellants challenged an order dated 17.11.2021 passed by the A.D.J.-I, Jehanabad, which took cognizance of offences under Sections 341, 342, 323, 467, 468, 420, 504, 506, and 34 of the IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), and 3(2)(va) of the SC/ST Act.

The case arose from a land dispute between Respondent No. 2 (informant) and a co-accused, Ashok Kumar. The appellants were witnesses to a sale deed executed by the informant, which later led to a Money Suit for recovery of consideration.

Following a police investigation, the police did not "send up" (charge) the appellants, but the trial court differed with the police conclusion and issued summons in a typed, mechanical format without assigning specific reasons.

1. Whether the trial court can validly take cognizance and differ from a police report (final form) without assigning specific reasons for such disagreement.

2. Whether an accused who himself belongs to a Scheduled Caste can be prosecuted for offences under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

The court applied Section 14A(2) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, regarding the maintainability of the appeal.

The court relied on the fundamental legal principle that while a Magistrate/Special Judge has the power to differ from a police conclusion, such an order must reflect the application of mind and provide reasons.

The court adhered to the statutory prerequisite of the SC/ST Act, which implies that the accused must not belong to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe to be charged under the Act’s specific penal provisions.

The trial court acted in a "mechanical manner" by using a pre-typed format and failing to assign even brief reasons for differing with the police investigation which had cleared the appellants. This lack of reasoning violates settled legal propositions regarding judicial orders of cognizance.

The court noted that the appellants themselves belong to the Scheduled Castes, a fact stated in the appeal and not refuted by the State. Since the SC/ST Act is intended to protect members of these communities from outsiders, taking cognizance of SC/ST Act offences against members of the same community is a material error that the trial court failed to consider.

The Court allowed the appeal and set aside the order dated 17.11.2021 insofar as it related to the appellants, and the matter was remanded to the trial court to pass a fresh order on the point of cognizance in accordance with the law and on its own merits.