JUDGMENT - S.C. PRATAP, J.:---The short but cardinal question around which the fate of the instant prosecution under section 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 ( hereafter briefly, the Act) ultimately revolves is whether a Buddhist is a member of a Scheduled Caste for the purposes of the said Act ?

2. The prosecution case, abbreviated to essentials, is as follows :---

On 4th March, 1977 at about 7 p.m., there was at village Bhalavali in Ratnagiri district, a palanquin procession. After its completion, several villagers, including the complainant herein and others, gathered in front of the house of one Parasharam Kelkar, the father of accused Nos. 1 and 2, to witness the play before the said palanquin. Soon thereafter, Mangala and Nandakumar (accused Nos. 1 and 2 ) came out of the house and insulted the complainant and others of his community telling them that they had become Buddhists, had stopped playing bands, had instead started dancing before and watching the palanquin and they should, therefore, leave. On 10th March, 1977, the complainant with others made an application to the local police stating that the aforesaid incident had resulted in injustice to the Buddhist

Click Here to Read the rest of this document