The court determined that the mens rea required under the SC/ST Act was not established due to lack of evidence proving caste-based intent in the alleged trespass, resulting in annulment of conviction under the SC/ST Act.

JUDGMENT :

FARJAND ALI, J.

1. The instant Criminal Appeal has been instituted by the appellants under Section 374 Cr.P.C. assailing the judgment dated 29.04.1995 rendered in Criminal Case No.71/1992 (4/1992) by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Pratapgarh. By the said judgment, the appellants were acquitted of the offence under Section 323 IPC yet concurrently convicted and sentenced as under:

2. The prosecution narrative, as unfurled through the FIR lodged by the complainant Smt. Radhi (PW-1), alleges that the appellants trespassed upon her land and assaulted her, thereby inflicting bodily injuries. Following the usual investigative process, the police opined that prima facie offences under Sections 447 , 323, and 34 IPC and Section 3(v) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 stood established. A charge- sheet was consequently filed, and the matter was committed for trial. The prosecution examined eleven witnesses and exhibited eleven documents in support of its case. The accused, in their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C., denied the allegations and produce DW1 in their defence evidence.

2.1. Upon completion of trial, the learned Court convicted the accused for the offence above and sentenced them as aforesaid. Aggrieved by the judgment aforesaid, the appellants have preferred the instant appeal.

3. I have meticulously heard learned counsel for both sides and perused the impugned judgment as well as the entire evidentiary corpus. Before embarking upon an appraisal of the merits of the appeal, it is apposite, indeed imperative, to examine whether the conviction under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act meets the statutory contours and evidentiary standards mandated by law.

3.1. The prosecution relies upon the Jama-Bandhi (Exhibit P-7) and the Trace Map (Exhibit P-8) to demonstrate that Khasra No.201 stands in the name of the complainant’s husband. PW-10 Labhchand, the Area Patwari, has duly authenticated these records. The complainant’s possession, therefore, stands incontrovertibly established.

3.2. However, mere ownership of the land does not, in and of itself, trigger the application of the stringent provisions of the SC/ ST Act. What is indispensable is a judicial determination regarding the mens rea of the accused namely, whether the alleged trespass was actuated by animus based on the complainant’s caste identity.

3.3. The evidence on record, both oral and documentary, clearly reflects that the parties have adjoining agricultural fields. It has emerged from cross-examination of several prosecution witnesses that the appellants had been using a narrow footpath (pugdandi) passing through the complainant’s land for many years to access their fields. This long-standing practice has been specifically asserted by the appellants in their statements under Section 313 CrPC.

3.4. The presence of a visible footpath and signs of regular usage demonstrate that the dispute between the parties was not sudden but was the continuation of a long-standing conflict over the right of way. PW-10 Labhchand Area Patwari candidly admitted that he had not inspected the site at the time of the incident and therefore could not state whether a traditional passage existed through the said land. This admission weakens the prosecution’s claim of deliberate and forcible trespass.

3.5. The FIR (Exhibit P-1), which constitutes the earliest and most spontaneous version of the incident, itself records that the quarrel arose because the complainant