JUDGMENT :

1. A Criminal Application No.412 of 2013 was filed by the original complainant for leave to assist the prosecution at the time of final hearing of the appeal. That application was allowed on 26.4.2013. Subsequently, on 14.1.2020 when the appeal was taken up, the original complainant’s representative was present in Court who informed the Court that their Advocate is not present on that day. The matter was stood over to 21.1.2020 and as accused were not represented, the Court appointed Mr. Rohan Savant, an Advocate as Amicus Curiae. In fact, the Court also had asked the original complainant’s representative whether she wishes to engage the Advocate from the Legal Aid Services Authority. The representative stated that she wanted the ^ljdkjh odhy* herself to argue. It appears that complainant has been sending representations to the registry for expeditiously hearing this matter as complainant is being continued to be harassed by the accused. I am not dealing with these allegations because that is not the subject matter of this appeal.

2. Today again no Advocate appeared for the original complainant and her representative says she is happy if learned APP Ms. Anamika Malhotra argues the matter. Pursuant thereto the learned APP and the learned Amicus Curiae were heard and the Court also with their assistance, went through the record & proceedings, the impugned judgment and the evidence. Before I proceed with the case, I must express my appreciation for the assistance rendered by Mr. Rohan Savant, learned amicus curiae. The endeavour put forth by Mr. Rohan Savant has been of immense value in rendering the judgment.

3. It is prosecution’s case that complainant Anusayabai Govind Lokhande was living with her husband, three daughters and three grand children in Heerabai Patil chawl at Thane, since prior to 1994. The house of accused is situated in front of the house of complainant.

4. In the year 1994, before the monsoon season started accused fixed a tin sheet over the door of their house, due to which rain water falling on the roof of their house would end up falling at the door of complainant’s house. Complainant therefore, requested accused to remove the said tin sheet at which time, accused abused complainant and refused to remove the tin sheet. Accused also are alleged to have told complainant that she could leave the house and go elsewhere. Since then, relationship between the two neighbours, i.e., accused and complainant got strained. Nothing seems to have happened for 5 1/2 years thereafter because the next incident which is the incident relating to the case in hand happened on 7.12.1999 at about 6.00 a.m. According to complainant, the husband of complainant had left the house at about 5.00 a.m. on 7.12.1999 for some work and complainant, her daughters and grand son were present in the house. At that time, accused no.2 threw water in front of her door, resulting in the door of complainant getting wet and the water also entered the house of complainant. Complainant asked accused no.2 why she threw water at her door whereupon accused no.1 came out of his house, pushed complainant and uttered words and abused like “Mahardya Ghanerdya Jathichya Ithun Kholi sodun Nighun Ja. Amhi Tumhala Mhardya Lokana Amache Kholi samor Thevanaar Nahi”. Both the accused uttered abuses on the basis of caste of complainant and these abuses were heard by daughter of complainant and also had been seen by other people in the chawl and grandson of complainant. Complainant thereafter, approached the social worker of her community, viz., Rajendra Gaikwad and narrated the incident to him and on his advise, lodged complaint with the police. Complainant belonged to Mahar (Nav Baudha) community. Offence was registered with the City Police Station, Thane and after due investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed against the accused charging the accused of offences punishable under Section 323 (Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 504 (Intentional ins