The prosecution must establish all elements of an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, including the absence of the accused's Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe membership and the racial prejudice in committing the offence.

Headnote:
Conviction - Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act - Sec. 376 and 506 IPC - Sec. 3(2)(v) of the Act
Fact of the Case:

The appellant was charged for offences under Sec. 376 and 506 IPC and Sec. 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The prosecution alleged that the accused, a security guard, raped a minor girl belonging to a Scheduled Tribe. The incident was reported to the authorities, and medical examinations were conducted.
Finding of the Court:

The court found the accused guilty under Sec. 376 and 506 IPC, but acquitted him under Sec. 3(2)(v) of the Act due to lack of evidence that the accused committed the offence on the ground of the victim's Scheduled Tribe status. The sentence under Sec. 376 IPC was reduced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment.
Issues: The issues included the credibility of the victim's testimony, the delay in filing the F.I. statement, and the application of Sec. 3(2)(v) of the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the prosecution to establish all elements of an offence under the Act, including the absence of the accused's Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe membership and the racial prejudice in committing the offence. The court also considered the age of the victim in determining the appropriate sentence under Sec. 376 IPC.
Final Decision: The conviction under Sec. 376 and 506 IPC was upheld, but the sentence under Sec. 376 IPC was reduced to seven years of rigorous imprisonment. The conviction and sentence under Sec. 3(2)(v) of the Act were set aside.

Judgment :-

KRISHNAN UNNI, J.

Appellant is the accused in S.C. No.6 of 1992 before Sessions Court, Wayanad. He was charged for the offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 (1) IPC and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "the Act"). The Court below found him guilty, convicted him and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 376 IPC and rigorous imprisonment for 6 months under Sec. 506 IPC and imprisonment for life under Section 3(2)(v) of the Act.

2. Crl.A. No. 103 of 1993 is filed by the appellant-accused through the Superintendent of Central Prison challenging the conviction and sentence entered against him. Crl.A. No. 367 of 1993 is also filed by him through counsel. Crl.R.C. No. 24 of 1993 is registered as per the direction of a learned Judge of this Court at the time of calendar revision. All the three cases were heard jointly and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

3. The prosecution case is that the accused who was a Security Guard of Priyadarshini Estate, Mananthavady and who was residing in one of the quarters there, raped PW.1, minor girl, on 2-3-1991 at about 1 p.m. threatening to kill her if she did not accede. She was also warned by him not to tell the incident to anyone. The scene of occurrence was the house of the accused. His wife and children were not present there. They had gone to Vithiri to attend a festival. The accused had asked PW.1 on 1-3-1991 to come to his house in the afternoon of 2-3-1991 for some household work. When she went she was forcibly taken to the bed-room and is alleged to have been raped by appellant. After the incident PW.1 was asked to wash herself and the evidence is that she did so. She then returned to her house and told her mother (PW.2) and her elder sisters about the incident. PW.3 is Kalyani's husband who is also residing in the same house. All of them are workers in the estate. PW.1 used to do petty jobs for others whenever required. These persons belong to Paniya community, included in the list of Scheduled Tribes. The accused belongs to an upper caste.

4. PWs. 2 and 3 took PW.1 to the Assistant Manager (PW.4) and reported the matter to him. He stated that the Secretary of the estate, PW.5 was on leave and asked them to wait till he returned. On 12-3-1991 when PW.5 returned from leave, PW.4 told him about the incident. He reported the matter to the Managing Director of the Estate, who is none other than the Sub-Collector of Mananthavady. He directed PW.1 to go to the Government Hospital and accordingly on 13-3-1991 she was examined by PW.9 doctor who referred the girl for detailed examination to PW.10, Dr. Sumathi, a Gynaecologist and they had issued a joint certificate Ext. P5. PW.1 was also examined by PW.12 the District Police Surgeon who conducted physical, dental and radiological tests and issued Ext. P7 certificate stating that PW.1 was aged above 14 but below 16 years.

5. After PW.1 was admitted in the hospital, the police was intimated and PW. 13 (Head Constable) went there and recorded Ext. P1 First Information statement of PW.1 and Ext. P8 F.I.R. Ext. P9 is the intimation given to the police in pursuance to which PW.13 went to the hospital. Thereafter investigation was taken over by PW.14. C.I. of Police. The accused was arrested on 14-3-1991 and was sent for potency test. He was examined by Dr. Balakrishnan (PW.11) on 15-3-1991 who issued Ext. P6 certificate. On receipt of F.I.R. in the case. PW.14 proceeded to the place of incident and prepared Ext. P2 scene mahazar and questioned the witnesses. PW.3 produced the saree, blouse and skirt, MOs. 1 to 3, worn by PW.1 at the time of incident which were taken into custody as per Ext. P3 mahazar. Statement of the witnesses was recorded and remand report was sent to the Magistrate. The material objects were sent to the chemical laboratory through Court. Ext. P13 is the chemical examination report. After

Click Here to Read the rest of this document