Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Satish Yetare, a journalist, filed a criminal revision application challenging the order dated 20.10.2015 passed by the 1st Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Kelapur in Special (Atro) Case No.7/2013, which rejected his application for discharge. The prosecution case was that the applicant was travelling in a S.T. bus and touched his finger to the body of the complainant from behind. An offence was registered under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The trial court, relying on the Supreme Court decision in Vidyadharan vs. State of Kerala, held that Section 3(1)(xi) is an aggravated form of Section 354 IPC and rejected the discharge application. The applicant's counsel argued that under the amended Section 3(1)(w) of the SC and ST Act, there must be knowledge on the part of the accused that the woman belongs to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The High Court examined the material on record and found that there was no material to show that the applicant knew that the complainant belonged to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. The court noted that the essential ingredient of knowledge was missing, and therefore the offence under the SC and ST Act was not made out. The court allowed the revision application, set aside the impugned order, and discharged the applicant from the offence under the SC and ST Act. However, the court clarified that the trial for the offence under Section 354 IPC would continue.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Discharge - Section 3(1)(xi) of SC and ST Act - Knowledge of Victim's Caste - The accused was charged under Section 354 IPC and Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC and ST Act for allegedly touching the complainant's back in a bus. The trial court rejected the discharge application relying on Vidyadharan vs. State of Kerala. The High Court held that the essential ingredient of knowledge that the victim belongs to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe is missing, and therefore the accused is entitled to discharge under the SC and ST Act. (Paras 1-6) B) Criminal Law - Discharge - Section 3(1)(xi) of SC and ST Act - Aggravated Form - Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC and ST Act is an aggravated form of Section 354 IPC, but the additional element of knowledge of the victim's caste must be present. In the absence of such knowledge, the offence under the SC and ST Act is not made out. (Paras 3-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the applicant/accused is entitled to be discharged under Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 when there is no material to show that he had knowledge that the complainant belonged to a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.
Final Decision
The revision application is allowed. The impugned order dated 20.10.2015 is set aside. The applicant is discharged from the offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The trial for the offence under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code shall continue.
Law Points
- Knowledge of victim's caste is essential ingredient for offence under Section 3(1)(w) of SC and ST Act
- Section 3(1)(xi) of SC and ST Act is aggravated form of Section 354 IPC
- Discharge application can be allowed if no prima facie case
