IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must prove intentional insult or intimidation based on caste to establish an offence under the Atrocity Act; mere membership of a Scheduled Caste is insufficient for conviction.

JUDGMENT :

HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.

1. Present appeal is filed by the appellant-State of Gujarat under Section 378(1)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the impugned judgment and order dated 27.03.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3, Deesa, Camp at Diyodar (hereinafter be referred to as “the trial Court”) in Special (Atrocity) Case No. 140 of 2007 for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 506(2) of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter be referred to as “the Atrocity Act”) whereby the trial Court has acquitted the accused for the alleged offence.

2. Brief facts of the present case, in nutshell, are as under:

2.1 It is the case of the prosecution that on 07.06.2006 at about 8.00 am the complainant was serving as driver in Bhabhar Nagarpalika was on duty and while he was passing through the market, the accused having shop in the market, who has put up coconut cotton bag outside the shop which was causing hindrance. It is alleged that the complainant told the accused to remove the coconut cloth bag on the way and in turn, the accused denied to remove the same and gave threat to the complainant and also used filthy language against the caste of the complainant with an intend to cause intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of a scheduled caste or a scheduled tribe in any place within public view. It is alleged that in view of the above, the quarrel took place for which the complainant has initially given written complaint at Exhibit 10.

2.2 On the basis of the said incident and written complaint at Exhibit 10, the FIR being C.R. No. II-3062/2006 came to be lodged with Bhabhar Police Station for the aforesaid offences against the accused. Since the offence is under the Atrocity Act, the case was handed over to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, who has taken the charge of the investigation and verified the FIR, drew the panchnama at the scene of offence, recorded statements of the witnesses and collected necessary evidence against the accused.

2.3 After completion of investigation, as the sufficient evidence was found, the police has filed the charge-sheet against all the accused before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Diyodar. As the offence was triable by the Court of Sessions, the concerned Court has committed the case under Section 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the Court of Sessions at Banaskantha at Palanpur wherein it has been registered as Special (Atrocity) Case No. 140 of 2007.

2.4 The charge against the accused came to be framed by the trial Court on 10.09.2007 for the aforesaid offences against the accused and explained it to him, the accused has denied having committed any offence. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and pleaded for trial and hence, the case was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.

2.5 To prove the case, the prosecution has examined as many as six witnesses and also produced the following documentary evidence.

2.6 After closure of the evidence, further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been recorded. After hearing both sides and considering the evidence on records, the trial Court by impugned judgment and order has acquitted the accused from all the charges levelled against him.

3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order of acquittal the appellant-State of Gujarat has preferred this Appeal.

4. Heard Ms. Jyoti Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant-State of Gujarat and Mr. Tushar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the respondent-accused at length.

5. Ms. Jyoti Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant-State of Gujarat, while referring to the entire oral as well as documentary evidence, has assailed the impugned judgment and order and has submitted