The prosecution must prove essential elements of criminal offences beyond reasonable doubt; mere abuse does not suffice for caste-based violations under the SC/ST Act.

ORDER:

Narendra Kumar Vyas, J.

The appellant has preferred this Acquittal Appeal under Section 372 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment of acquittal dated 20-2-2020 (Annexure A/1) passed by the learned Special Judge under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Mahasamund, District Mahasamund in Special (Atrocities) Sessions Trial No. H-11/2015 whereby the learned trial Court has acquitted the accused/respondents No.2 and 3 for commission of offence under Sections 294, 452, 388/34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “the Act, 1989”).

2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 27.07.2014 complainant/appellant made a written complaint (Ex. P/4) before Police Station Saraipali, District Mahasamund against respondents No.2 and 3 alleging that the complainant/appellant is working as Sub Engineer in Public Works Department and resident of village Deori, District Jashpur and his wife is also working as Teacher Panchayat. Out of their earning they have purchased 23 acres of land situated at Salhepali through registered sale deed 11-11-2011 from one Jagbandhu Bhoi, resident of village Belmundi. It is also alleged that after notice of the fact that the land has been purchased by him, respondents No.2- Raj Kumar Agrawal and respondent No. 3- Saurabh Agrawal forcibly entered into the house of the complainant, started threatening, asking them about source of funds and extorted Rs.5,00,000/- from him otherwise, news will be published in the newspaper against them. They have also threatened that the sale deed would be cancelled.

3. It is also the case of the complainant that the complainant & his wife informed the accused/respondents No.2 and 3 that they have purchased the land from their own earnings and they have not done any illegal work, thereafter, respondent No.2 -Rajkumar Agrawal abused him by caste and thereafter he left the house. The abuses uttered by respondent No.2- Rajkumar were heard by one Lalit Kumar and other local residents. It has also been contended that son of Raj Kumar Agrawal namely Soram Agrawal (Goyal) also published the news against the complainant and started torturing them, therefore, prayed for taking suitable action against them. On the basis of the complaint dated 27.07.2014 (Ex.P/4), FIR has been registered against respondents No. 2 & 3 for commission of offence under Sections 294, 452/34 along with Section 3 (1)(x) of the Act, 1989 reiterating the stand contained in the complaint. The prosecution after usual investigation has submitted the charge-sheet before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mahasamund on 21.09.2015 for commission of offence under Sections 294, 452, 385, 506, 34 of IPC and Section 3 (1)(x) of the Act, 1989 who has committed the case for trial to the Sessions Judge, Mahasamund on 19.09.2015.

4. In order to bring home the guilt of accused/respondents, the prosecution has examined as many as 10 witnesses namely- Sanjay Kumar Das (PW/1), Lalit Kumar Barmate (PW/2), Arvind Gilhare (PW/3), complainant Bhurang Sai Paikra (PW/4), Rupvati Paikra (PW/5), Keshari Nandan (PW/6), G. Suresh Kumar Samant (PW/7), Kartik Chand (PW/8), Manoj Kumar Baank (PW/9) & S.S. Paikra (PW/10) and exhibited documents namely statement of witness Sanjay Das (Ex.P/1), property seizure memo (Ex.P/2 & 3), Written complaint to Thana Saraipali (Ex.P/4), FIR (Ex.P/5), Patwari Map (ExP/6), Crime details form (Ex.P/7), Patwari Panchnama (Ex.P/8), statement of witne