1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 22/03/2004 passed by the Special Judge under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in Special Case No.26/2002 on the file of the learned 16th Ad hoc Assistant Sessions Judge at Nagpur whereby the appellant was convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 451 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (xi) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Special Act"). For the offence punishable under the Special Act, the appellant was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for fifteen days. He was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 354 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment. He was further convicted for the offence punishable u/s. 451 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. The appellant was facing trial on the ground that he, not being a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe, on or about 03/02/2002, at about 10 a.m., at the village Madavghorad within the local limits of Hingna Police Station, committed house trespass in the house of the Complainant and sexually exploited Sau Parvatabai Shankarrao Kove belonging to 'Gond' Scheduled Tribe and outraged her modesty.

3. The prosecution's story in short is that the Complainant Parvatabai had attended the agricultural work during the morning from 7.30 a.m. to 10 a.m. and returned to her house at about 10.30 a.m. She took bath at about 11 a.m. at the bathroom situated outside her house and after bath returned inside. While she was wearing petticoat by tying the knot and putting Sari on her body. The accused came from her backside and caught hold of her and laid her down on the cot and sat on her chest. She saw the accused Namdeo Agarkar, resident of the same village. She shouted and after that the accused left her house. After hearing her shouts, her cousin mother–in-law Sau Pushpabai came there. She also saw the accused and asked him to stop, but he did not stop. Brother-in–law of the Complainant also came there. The prosecutrix narrated what had happened at the relevant time. At the time of the incident, her husband had gone out for grazing the goats. The investigation followed after the complaint was lodged. The investigating agency found that the accused belonged to 'Sutar' caste (not being a Scheduled Caste or tribe), while the Complainant belonged to 'Gond' Scheduled tribe. The Spot panchanama was drawn and Statement of witnesses were recorded. The accused was arrested and upon completion of the investigation, was charge sheeted in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, 10th Court, Nagpur. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions. On 22/08/2003, Charge was framed. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution had examined 8 witnesses.

4. Evidence of prosecutrix – Parvatabai Shankarrao Kove (PW1) is criticized on the ground that she made improvement to her version before the police (Ex.5) stating in the Court that she had gone to the agricultural field to work in the morning from 7.30 a.m. till 10 a.m. However, there appears no much difference between the substance of the version in FIR and in the Court. On 03/02/2002 (Sunday), when she was alone in her house, she had taken bath at about 11 a.m. and came back from the bathroom, when the accused came from behind her. While the prosecutrix was tying the knot of her petticoat, he held her by her waist and laid her on the cot and sat upon her. When she raised shouts, accused Namdeo Agarkar ran away. Her cousin Mother-in-law Pushpa came after hearing her shouts, as also brother-in-law of the prosecutrix to whom she had narrated the incident.