The prosecution must substantiate allegations of caste-based abuse with credible evidence, and delays in complaint filing can undermine the case's integrity.

JUDGMENT :

GITA GOPI, J.

1. The present appeal was filed by four appellants challenging the judgment and order of conviction and sentence pronounced on 4.3.2006 by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Ahmedabad (Rural) in Special Atrocity Case no.37 of 2004. The case against the accused was under sections 323, 452, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (IPC) and section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Atrocities Act”).

2. The learned Judge found the accused guilty under section 323, read with section 114 of IPC and sentenced the accused for six months rigorous imprisonment. For the section 452, read with section 114 of IPC, the sentence ordered was one year rigourous imprisonment and Rs.500/- fine, in default of payment of fine, further 15 days simple imprisonment. Further, for the offence under section 504, read with section 114 of IPC, 3 months rigourous imprisonment, and the sentence for section 506(2) with section 114 of IPC, ordered six months rigourous imprisonment, while for the offence under section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act, the punishment is for one year rigourous imprisonment and Rs.500/- fine and in failure to payment of the fine, one month simple imprisonment.

3. Appellant no.1 died during the pendency of the appeal. Thus, the appeal stands abated against appellant no.1. It has been submitted that appellant no.4 was juvenile at the time of alleged offence.

4. The case against the accused as alleged can be briefly laid down as under:-

4.1 Original complainant – Surajben Sardhanbhai Parmar resident of Jagatpur Taluka Dascroi, filed a criminal complaint on 29.5.2004 alleging that 10 years prior, accused no.1 had borrowed an amount of Rs.10,000/- from her mother-in-law, Ramiben Jenabhai Parmar, as there was an occasion of marriage ceremony of daughter of accused no.1. Inspite of repeated demands, the borrowed money was not repaid. It is stated that accused no.1 sold his land on 24.5.2004, so the complainant demanded the borrowed amount from accused no.1. It is alleged that accused no.1 got excited and retorted saying, ‘what amount and what the talk’ and gave threat to kill if the amount was demanded. It was further alleged that the complainant and others got frightened and dared not to say anything.

4.2 It is alleged in the complaint that on the same day, i.e. on 24.5.2004 at about 10.00 PM, accused nos.1 and 2 came with sticks and started hurling abuses loudly and dragged the complainant out of her house. It is alleged that accused no.1 gave a stick blow on the waist and accused no.2 gave a stick blow on the right hand and also gave pushes with stick on her right leg. It is also alleged that accused nos.3 and 4 who had also come there were standing outside the house, gave fist and kick blows to the complainant.

4.3 It is stated that the complainant raised alarm and her husband Sardhanbhai and neighbour, Ashokbhai Sombhai Parmar came there, intervened, to save her from further beatings. It is alleged that while going, the accused persons used abusive/insulting language, referring to their caste gave threat to kill, in case of demanding money.

5. Learned Senior Advocate Mr. J.M. Panchal assisted by learned advocate Mr. K.J. Panchal submitted referring to charge at Exh.4, that the dispute as alleged was about some monetary transaction, which had taken place ten years ago, thus, learned Senior Advocate Mr. Panchal submitted that the dispute was not because that the accused were