1. The appeal is filed by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 16th June 2007 passed by the Special Judge, Bhandara in Special Case No. 22 of 2006 whereby appellant-accused has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for four years and to pay a fine of Rs. 7000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. It was also directed that amount of fine if recovered, an amount of Rs. 5000/- be made over to the prosecutrix as compensation.

2. Appellant-accused is headmaster of “Government Ashram School” at village Kadikasa, District Gondia. Prosecutrix, stated to be 15 years old, was studying in the said Government Ashram School in 8th standard at the relevant time and she was staying at the hostel of the said Government Ashram school. Prosecutrix lodged report with Police Station, Chichgarh alleging that in the month of September 2005 when she was standing in front of hostel room, accused came near her and asked her as to whether she would come to his room at midnight. According to her, accused asked her to open the door if he did not keep it open. She expressed her displeasure. She reported another incident to the effect that after some days thereafter, accused came to her room and on seeing him, girls ran away and when she too started going, accused stopped her by giving a call; kissed her and went away. It was further stated in the report that on 18.9.2006 accused again approached her and said that his wife was going out of station and whether prosecutrix would come to his place during night. Upon this, she felt sad and left for her village. Accused followed her to the village and inquired as to why prosecutrix had left the hostel without his prior permission. On the next day (Monday), prosecutrix attended school. When she went to bring broom from the office with her friend Santoshi Saunjal, accused held her hand and kissed her. Prosecutrix left for her village after 24 days. Accused followed her and informed about her absence to her mother. She returned to the school. Her mother also came to the school. In the afternoon prosecutrix narrated about the behaviour of accused to her mother and in her presence, her mother raised protests and told the accused that she would not continue her daughter at the hostel and would shift her to some relative at village Manutola. According to prosecutrix, since then she is residing at the said place with one Uike, her relative.

3. On the basis of oral report (exhibit 10) offences punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3 (1) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, the “Atrocities Act”) came to be registered against the appellant-accused. PW 8 Sangramsingh, SDPO, Deori carried out investigation and in that, he recorded statements of witnesses including the prosecutrix by visiting the Ashram School and collected relevant records from the school. After investigation was over, charge-sheet was filed before the JMFC, Sakoli who committed the case to the Special Court for trial according to law.

4. Charge for the aforesaid offences was framed and it was read over and explained to the accused which he denied and claimed to be tried. Defence of the accused as is extracted from cross-examination of witnesses and his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr. P. C. is that as a Headmaster it was his bounden duty to maintain proper discipline in the School. He had planned an ideal Ashram School, but the shirkers were unhappy due to strict administrative decisions and they had given wrong and false statements. Appellant invited irk of students, staff and was disliked by them. He had blemishless career till his implication in the false case. The prosecutrix had habit to leave school without informing the school authorities. One Cha