Case Note & Summary
The State of Gujarat appealed against the judgment of acquittal dated 07.08.2012 passed by the learned Special Judge, Bharuch, Camp at Ankleshwar, in Special (Atrocity) Case No.31 of 2011. The respondents (original accused) were acquitted of offences under Sections 323, 504, 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The prosecution case was that on 04.11.2010 at about 7:00 p.m., on the occasion of Diwali, accused No.1 ignited firecrackers in front of the complainant's house and threw them on the terrace of the complainant's house. The complainant, a member of the Scheduled Caste, alleged that the accused used caste-based abusive language and assaulted him. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution witnesses unreliable and the evidence insufficient. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence and held that the prosecution failed to prove the ingredients of Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act, as the alleged insult was not in public view. The medical evidence did not corroborate the alleged assault. The court found no perversity in the trial court's findings and dismissed the appeal, upholding the acquittal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Appeal - Acquittal Appeal - Section 378 CrPC - Standard of Review - The High Court in an appeal against acquittal will not interfere unless the findings are perverse or unreasonable. The presumption of innocence is strengthened by acquittal. (Paras 1-5) B) Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 - Section 3(1)(x) - Ingredients - Intentional insult or intimidation with intent to humiliate a member of SC/ST in public view - The prosecution failed to prove that the alleged insult occurred in public view or that the accused had the requisite intent. The incident of throwing firecrackers on the terrace was not in public view. (Paras 6-10) C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 323, 504, 114 - Assault and Criminal Intimidation - The evidence of the complainant and witnesses was inconsistent and lacked credibility. The medical evidence did not support the alleged injuries. The accused were entitled to benefit of doubt. (Paras 11-15)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the Special Judge, Bharuch, Camp at Ankleshwar, in Special (Atrocity) Case No.31 of 2011, for offences under Sections 323, 504, 114 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act, is perverse and liable to be set aside.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment of acquittal passed by the Special Judge, Bharuch, Camp at Ankleshwar, in Special (Atrocity) Case No.31 of 2011.
Law Points
- Acquittal appeal under Section 378 CrPC
- standard of proof in criminal appeal against acquittal
- ingredients of Section 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act require intentional insult or intimidation in public view
- benefit of doubt to accused
- credibility of prosecution witnesses
