IMPORTANT POINT
For an offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST POA Act, intent to act against a person based on their caste status is essential; mere reference to caste without such intent is insufficient.

ORDER :

C. JAYACHANDRAN, J.

The petitioners herein are the accused persons in crime no.322/2012, now pending as S.C. No.343/2019 of the Special Court for SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Thrissur. The offences alleged under Sections 452, 324, 354, 427, 294 (b), read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the SC/ST POA Act’ for short). The petitioners seek Annexure-A4 final report, Annexure-A6 Court charge in S.C. No.343/2019 and all further proceedings in the said Sessions Case to be quashed.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. Notice issued to the fourth respondent/defacto complainant was returned with the endorsement “unclaimed”, wherefore sersvice on that respondent is considered as deemed. Perused the records.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the incident took place on 21.04.2012 and a crime was registered as crime no.322/2012 of Cherppu Police Station, Thrissur. Therein, the offences alleged were under Sections 452, 324, 294(b), 354 and 427, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The investigation was complete and the final report was filed before the Jurisdictional Magistrate. After six years, an application was preferred by the Investigating OfÏcer under Section 173 (8) of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking further investigation. The same was allowed, vide Annexure-A3. A perusal of paragraph no. 2 of Annexure-A3 would indicate that one among the aggrieved persons / CW3 preferred a complaint before the District Police Chief for further investigation and, accordingly, the case was re-opened. Pursuant to Annexure-A3, investigation was conducted and Annexure-A4 final report was filed, wherein offence under Section 3(1)(ix) of the SC/ST POA Act is also seen incorporated. Learned counsel invited the attention of this Court to the statements of the injured persons, as originally recorded, and the one recorded during the course of further investigation. In the statements originally recorded, there is no allegation whatsoever, with respect to the dishonour, or for that matter, outraging the modesty of the injured persons. There is not even a reference to the caste status of the petitioners, or for that matter, of the accused persons in their original statements. When it came to the statements recorded during the course of further investigation, there is a reference to the caste status, and it is stated that the injured persons belongs to the Hindu – Vettuva community, whereas the accused persons were Christians; and that the allegation of the trespass and assault was made by the accused persons with knowledge that the injured persons belongs to the caste, Hindu – Vettuva. The learned counsel would emphatically submit that, in the subsequent statements as well - baring from reference to the caste status - there is nothing stated, so as to attract the offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST POA Act (unamended). There is no allegation that assault or force, was used with intent to dishonour or outrage the modesty of the victims. The learned counsel would rely upon the recent judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Dashrath Sahu v. State of Chhattisgarh [2024 KHC 8036] to point out that, unless the alleged overt act is committed with the intent to dishonour or outrage the modesty, the offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST POA Act will not lie. It was also held that an offence must be committed on a person belonging to the scheduled caste or scheduled tribe, with the intention that it was being done on the ground of caste. The learned counsel would hasten to add that, if the alleged aggression is on the ground of caste, the same would have found a place in the original statement made by the alleged victims. The very fact that they have chosen to give a complaint to the District Police Chief after a lapse of