Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Raju Dashrath Sadar, Suresh Dashrath Sadar, Bharat Dashrath Sadar, and Ganesh Bhagwat Sadar, were convicted by the 2nd Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Washim on 28.11.2005 in Atrocity Case No. 10/2005 for offences under Sections 323, 294, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The case arose from a loan transaction where the complainant Devidas (PW1) borrowed Rs.2500 from appellant Raju on 13.12.2003. On 02.11.2004, Raju allegedly called the complainant to a cattle shed and demanded repayment, leading to an altercation where the appellants allegedly abused the complainant by caste name, assaulted him, and threatened him. The trial court convicted all appellants under Sections 294, 506 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act, and appellant Raju additionally under Section 323 IPC. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence and found that the essential ingredient of 'public view' under Section 3(1)(x) was not satisfied as the incident occurred in a cattle shed. The court also noted inconsistencies in the prosecution evidence regarding the alleged hurt and obscene acts. Consequently, the High Court allowed the appeal, set aside the convictions, and acquitted all appellants of all charges.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(x) - Public View - The essential ingredient of the offence under Section 3(1)(x) is that the insult or intimidation must be in public view. In the present case, the alleged incident occurred in a cattle shed, which is not a place within public view. Therefore, the conviction under this section is unsustainable. (Paras 10-12) B) Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 323, 294, 506 read with Section 34 - Hurt, Obscene Act, Criminal Intimidation - The evidence of the complainant and witnesses was found to be inconsistent and unreliable. The medical evidence did not support the allegation of hurt. The alleged obscene act and criminal intimidation were not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, the convictions under these sections are also set aside. (Paras 13-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act is sustainable when the alleged incident occurred in a cattle shed, not in public view, and whether the other convictions under IPC are supported by evidence.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Convictions and sentences set aside. Appellants acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act requires insult or intimidation in public view
- Section 323 IPC requires hurt
- Section 294 IPC requires obscene act in public place
- Section 506 IPC requires criminal intimidation
- Section 34 IPC common intention
