Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the judgment dated 8-1-1997 of the VI Additional Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No. 73 of 1996, which acquitted the respondents Ramesh Shankar Junavane and Raju Doulat Devade of offences under Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The prosecution case was that on 25-11-1995 at about 8.30 p.m., Asrabai and Sozarbai went near the school building of Kendriya Vidyalaya in Kasturba Vasahat Zopadapatti, Junavane Nagar, Aundh, Pune to answer the call of nature. The accused confronted them and told them that the place around the school was not for that purpose, and allegedly insulted them on caste basis. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution witnesses unreliable and that the incident did not occur in public view. The High Court, in appeal, re-appreciated the evidence and found no perversity in the trial court's findings. The court held that the offence under Section 3(1)(x) requires the insult to be in public view, and there was no evidence of any member of the public present. The witnesses were inconsistent and improvements were made. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Acquittal Appeal - Standard of Review - In an appeal against acquittal, the High Court will not interfere unless the findings are perverse or unreasonable - The appellate court must give due weight to the trial court's opinion of acquittal - Held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt (Paras 1-2). B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(x) - Public View - The offence under Section 3(1)(x) requires that the insult or intimidation be in public view - The incident near a school building at night, with no evidence of any member of the public present, does not satisfy the requirement of public view - Held that the acquittal was justified (Paras 3-5). C) Evidence Act, 1872 - Appreciation of Evidence - Unreliable Witnesses - The prosecution witnesses were found to be unreliable due to contradictions and improvements in their testimony - The trial court's assessment of evidence was not perverse - Held that the appellate court cannot substitute its own view (Paras 2-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the respondents for offences under Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was correct in law.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Acquittal of respondents upheld.
Law Points
- Acquittal upheld
- lack of public view
- unreliable witnesses
- no caste-based insult
- Section 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act requires public view
- benefit of doubt
