Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
A.V.RAVINDRA BABU, K SREENIVASA REDDY, JJ.
Shaik Jani Basha – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra – Respondent
CRIMINAL PETITION NO: 1407 OF 2023, 1704 OF 2009
Decided On : 18-12-2023
Criminal Appeal - SCs & STs Act - Section 3(1)(x) - Summary of Acts and Sections: The court discussed the charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and the evidence presented by the prosecution. The judgment focused on the delay in lodging the report, the presence of land disputes, and the credibility of the witnesses. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused insulted and humiliated the victim in the name of caste, leading to the acquittal of the accused under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs & STs Act.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved an incident where the accused were charged with insulting and humiliating the victim in the name of caste. The prosecution presented evidence of the incident and the subsequent legal proceedings. The accused denied the charges and claimed that the delay in lodging the report, presence of land disputes, and the credibility of the witnesses undermined the prosecution's case.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove that the accused insulted and humiliated the victim in the name of caste. The court highlighted the delay in lodging the report, the presence of land disputes, and the lack of credibility of the witnesses as factors that led to the acquittal of the accused.
Issues: The key issues revolved around the credibility of the witnesses, the delay in lodging the report, and the presence of land disputes. The court analyzed these issues to determine the guilt of the accused under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs & STs Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of credible evidence to support the prosecution's case. The delay in lodging the report, the presence of land disputes, and the lack of credibility of the witnesses led to the acquittal of the accused.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal, setting aside the judgment and acquitting the accused of the charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs & STs Act.
JUDGMENT:
A.V.RAVINDRA BABU. J.
Challenge in this Criminal Appeal is to the judgment, dated 24.11.2009 in S.C.No.271 of 2009 on the file of the Special Sessions Judge for S.C./S.T Cases, Anantapur (for short, “the learned Special Judge”), where under the learned Special Judge found the appellants A.1 and A.2 guilty of the charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, “the SCs & STs Act”), convicted them under Section 235(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, “the Cr.P.C.”) and after questioning about the quantum of sentence, sentenced them to suffer Rigorous Imprisonment for two (2) years each and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-each in default to suffer Simple Imprisonment for six (6) months and four (4) months respectively. The learned Special Judge in the said judgment exonerated A.3 of the charges under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs & STs Act and further exonerated A.1 to A.3 for the charge under Section 352 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “the IPC”).
2. The parties to this Criminal Appeal will hereinafter be referred to as described before the learned Special Judge, for the sake of convenience.
3. (i) The S.C.No.271 of 2009 arose out of committal order in P.R.C.No.20 of 2009 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of I Class at Penukonda pertaining to Crime No. 55 of 2008 of S.H.O., Somandepalli Police Station. The State represented by Sub Divisional Police Officer, Penukonda filed the charge sheet alleging the offence under Section 352 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs & STs Act in the aforesaid crime number.
(ii) The case of the prosecution in brief is that. A.1 to A.3 are the residents of Mage Chervu Village of Somandepalli Mandal. They belonged to Uppara Caste which is upper caste. The de-facto complainant i.e., LW.1-Harijana Ademma and LW.2-M.Narasimhulu her son, belonged to Schedule Caste. LW.6-M.Peddakka is the daughter-in-law of the LW.1.
4. (i) On 06.09.2008, LW.2-M.Narasimhulu went to his field for grazing his cow. On the same day, at 04.00 PM, the cow of him went into the fields of A.3 for grazing. By then LW.2 was at little distance without chappals. A.3 came there questioned him as to why he left the cow in to his ground nut field. He (LW.2) replied that he will bring the cow from the field. A.3 did not hear the words of him, grew wild and caught hold of the clothes of him. There was wordly quarrel between A.3 and LW.2. A.3 torned the banian of LW.2. Clothes of A.3 were also torned when LW.2 caught hold the clothes of A.3. The persons who gathered there pacified the matter. LW.2 informed the incident to his mother i.e., LW.1. He went to Somandepalli Police station to report the matter to police. A.3 also intimated the incident to his family members.
(ii) On 06.09.2008 at 06.30 PM, when LW.1 was returning to her house from the field and when she reached near the house of LW.4-Harijana Nagappa, A.1 and A.2 at the instigation of A.3, scolded her and abused her as “Yea Madiga
Lanja” by referring her caste and questioned her how her son is dare enough to give a report to Police against accused. A.1 and A.2 scolded her in filthy words in the street. LW.3-Harijana Chaduvvu Kadirappa, LW.4-Harijana Nagappa and LW.-Harijana Eerappagari Kollappa witnessed the offence and questioned high handedness of A.1 and A.2 and A.3. The SC Colony people also questioned the behavior of A.1 and A.2. However, they continued to abuse the victim. Due to fear of A.1 and A.2, she went to her house. Later her husband and sons returned to her house. She informed the incident to them. Lw.8-G.Sreeramulu, LW.2 and brothers of LW.2 met Village elders who promised them they will settle the issue by arranging panchayath but in vain. Though LW.1 and 2 and her family members waited for the answer of Village elders, It did not yield any result. Therefore on 14.09.2008 at 07.00 PM, she preferred a report before LW.9-Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police, Samandepalli Poli
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for credible evidence to prove charges under the SCs & STs Act. The court emphasized the importance of considering factors such ....
![Uppara Venkatesulu, S/o. Mulinti Anjinappa, Magecheruvu[V], Anantapur VS State Of A. P. , Rep. By P. P. - 2023 Supreme(AP) 1509](https://supremetoday-s3.b-cdn.net/Andhra_Pradesh_2.png)
Prosecution must prove charges under the SCs & STs Act beyond reasonable doubt; unexplained delay in lodging FIR can undermine case credibility.
The importance of prompt lodging of FIR in criminal cases and the need for evidence to establish the presence of the public at the time of the offense to satisfy the criteria of 'public view' under S....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of prompt lodging of reports to avoid embellishments and afterthoughts, as well as the need for a proper explanation for any delay i....
The court confirmed the conviction under the SC/ST Act for caste-based assault, emphasizing the weight of corroborative evidence from the injured parties and proper explanation for the delay in filin....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt and the importance of properly appreciating the evidence presented in a case.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
