Criminal liability under the S.C. and S.T. Act requires intent to humiliate based on caste, not merely abusive language in property disputes.

JUDGMENT :

Arun Kumar Rai, J.

1. Heard Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, learned Spl.P.P. for the State.

2. This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 23.01.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-1-cum-Special Judge, Sahibganj in Special Case No. 40 of 2005 for the offence under Sections 3(1)(V) and (X) of the S.C./S.T. Act ( Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to undergo RI for one year and also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine have to undergo further simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

3. The present case came into an existence on the filing of a complaint case by one Chandradeo Baitha son of late Sukhan Baitha who stated therein, that he is a retired person and belongs to Scheduled caste. It is further stated by the complainant that one proposal for purchase of 125 bighas of land in Hariprasad and Rampur Diyara area was advanced by Balram Yadav ( father of the present appellant) and he had also given assurance to the complainant that he would look after the said land.

One agreement to this effect was executed between the seller and the complainant and rate of land was agreed at Rs. 1200/- per bigha and out of which Rs. 800/- per bighas for 125 bighas had already been paid by the complainant with a condition that at the time of registration of said land, remaining amount of Rs. 400 per bigha would be paid to the seller. Description of land and name of seller has also been mentioned in the complaint.

It is further alleged by the complainant that the above said land had been taken care of by Balram Yadav but he usurped the produce of land and he did not give any account of produce of the land and on complainant’s query, he used to tell that produce had been looted/taken away by the miscreants. On account of above said conduct of Balram Yadav and appellant, complainant took land under his control and had given contract/lease of land to Jiaul Haque and ten other villagers on 01.09.2003 for a period of one year and they sowed Kelai crop on the land. Thereafter, it is alleged that the person who took land on lease asked complainant that they would sow parwal, then complainant along with one Shiv Prasad Thakur (C.W.-2) and Mahendra Yadav visited on the land for the purpose of measurement on 05.11.2003 at 11:00 A.M. When the land was being measured and complainant was having interaction with lease holders, then appellant along with two others came to the land with lathi and pistol and called complainant “Harijan Dhobi” and also abused him and asked the complainant to flee away from the land. It is further alleged that when complainant forbade them from doing so, then they extended threat that his throat would be slit and thrown away, then after intervention of other person’s, complainant was taken away from there. It is also alleged that accused persons cut Kelia sowed on the said land, then complainant made an effort, to meet Balram Yadav (father of the appellant) but Balram Yadav evaded meeting him. Complainant received information regarding loot of Kelai crop on 25.11.2003 and he apprised the incident to higher officials but nothing was done.

4. It is further alleged that on 01.12.2003, he was at his residence at Jirwabari, (Sahibganj), then at 6:30 appellant and his father along with two others abused complainant by saying “Harijan” and asked to handover the aforesaid lands to them, otherwise he would lose his life, as such, complainant got scared and on commotion accused persons fled away.

5. The above said complaint was numbered as P.C.R. case no. 234 of 2003 and present appellant an