Mr. Sangeet Lodha, J.

This criminal leave to appeal under Section 378 (i) & (iii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") is preferred by the appellant-State of Rajasthan aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 27.10.2015 passed by learned Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Bikaner (for short "the trial court" hereinafter) whereby, the accused-respondent has been acquitted of the charges levelled against him for the offences punishable under Section 504 IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short "the SC/ST Act").

2. The brief facts of the case are that a written complaint (Ex.P-1) was submitted by the complainant-Uttamaram on 4.5.10 to the Station House Officer, Police Station Panchu, District Bikaner stating that on 27.4.2010, he and one Shivdan were filling their water container from the water tank in Meghwals' Mohalla. While, standing by the side of Shivdan, the complainant's hand touched the water container of Shivdan. The accused Shivdan started abusing the complainant in the name of caste and assaulted him stating that he has spoiled his water container. In the meanwhile, the complainant's brother Om Prakash, Roopa Ram, Ishudan, Sumerdan and Kesuram came and rescued him.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid written report, a first information report being No.27/2010 was registered at Police Station Panchu, District Bikaner for the offences under Section 323 IPC and Section 3 (1) (xi) of the SC/ST Act. After investigation, the police filed challan against the accused respondent for the offence under Section 504 IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of the SC/ST Act, before the Judicial Magistrate, Nokha, from where the case was committed to the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Cases), Bikaner.

4. The trial court framed the charges against the accused respondent for offences under Section 504 IPC and 3 (1)(x) of the SC/ST Act. The accused-respondent denied the charges and claimed trial.

5. The prosecution produced and examined as many as seven witnesses i.e. PW-1 to PW-7 before the trial court. The statement of the accused-respondent were recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. wherein, he denied his involvement in the commission of the offence and alleged that he has been falsely implicated in the case. The accused respondent did not produce any evidence in his defence.

6. After due consideration of the evidence on record, the trial court arrived at the finding that on the basis of the evidence adduced, charges are not proved and accordingly, acquitted the accused person of the offences charged.

Hence, this leave to appeal.

7. Learned public prosecutor submitted that the learned trial court fell in error in acquitting the accused-respondent of the offences charged inasmuch there is ample evidence available on record which establishes the charges against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Learned Public Prosecutor drawing the attention of the court to the statements of PW 2-Isudan, PW 3-Om Prakash, urged that from their deposition, it stands sufficiently proved that the accused intentionally insulted the complainant, a member of Scheduled Caste, at the place within the public view and thus, the trial court without appreciating the evidence on record objectively, has erred in acquitting the accused.

8. I have heard learned public prosecutor for the State and carefully gone through the impugned judgment as also the record of the court below.

9. It is to be noticed that in the instant case, the complainant PW-1, in his examination in chief, stated that the accused Shivdan abused him in the name of the caste and thereafter used abusive and filthy language. It is further deposed by him that upon raising noise, Om Prakash, Ishudan, Sumerdan, Ruparam and Keshudan came there and rescued him and at that time also, the accused abused him in the name of caste. It is pertinent to note that in the FIR (Ex.P/1), the