Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
N. Sathish Kumar, J.
Mookkandi – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 444 of 2008
Decided On : 03-10-2018
SC/ST (PA) Act - Scheduled Caste Community - Section 506(1) IPC, Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST (PA) Act, Section 323 IPC - [506(1) IPC, 3(1)(X) of SC/ST (PA) Act, 323 IPC] - The court discussed the evidence presented and highlighted the requirement for abuse or humiliation in public view to establish an offense under Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST (PA) Act. It emphasized the lack of independent witnesses and the nature of existing disputes as factors leading to false implication, ultimately leading to the extension of the benefit of doubt to the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The case involved a dispute between the accused and the family of a member of the Scheduled Caste Community. The accused were convicted under various sections including Section 506(1) IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST (PA) Act based on an alleged incident of wrongful restraint, assault, and abuse using caste name.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented was not sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It highlighted the lack of support from independent witnesses, the absence of evidence of abuse or humiliation in public view, and the nature of existing disputes as factors leading to false implication.
Issues: The key issue was whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the appellants/accused beyond reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the requirement for abuse or humiliation in public view to establish an offense under Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST (PA) Act. It also highlighted the lack of independent witnesses and the nature of existing disputes as factors leading to false implication.
Final Decision: The conviction and sentence imposed by the trial court were set aside, and the appellants/accused were acquitted of all charges in respect of the case. The fine amount, if paid, was ordered to be refunded to the appellants/accused, and their bail bonds were terminated.
1. This criminal appeal is preferred against the conviction and sentence passed by the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Tirunelveli, Tirunelveli District, in S.C. No. 60 of 2005, dated 30.09.2008, in and by which, the Trial Court, though acquitted both the accused for offence under Sections 341, 506(2) IPC and 3(1)(XV) of SC/ST (PA) Act, has convicted both the accused as follows:
(i) under Section 506(1) IPC sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, with the default sentence of two months simple imprisonment.
(ii) under Section 3(1)(X) of SC/ST (PA) Act sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- each, with the default sentence of one month simple imprisonment.
(iii) convicted the second accused under Section 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- with the default sentence of two months simple imprisonment. The sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently.
2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:
2.1. PW-1 is a member of Scheduled Caste Community. There were dispute between the accused and the family of PW-1 and his brother, over the alleged connection of A1's daughter with PW-1's brother, due to which, A1 moved to Tirupur. Thereafter, on 06.12.2014, A1 returned the village and it is alleged that when PW-1 and his brother came near a Temple in the village, both the accused wrongfully restrained them and A2 assaulted PW-1's brother and A1 threatened with Aruval and also abused them using caste name. Subsequent thereto, PW-1's brother, namely, Ramar lodged the complaint. PW-4 is the brother of PW-1. According to him, there was a rumor spread in the village that PW-4 is having illegal connection with A1's daughter and therefore, he went to Pudukottai and PW-5, on the date of occurrence, accompanied Ramar to the Police Station and lodged the complaint.
2.2. PW-9 treated Ramar and found no external injuries. Further, PW-9 issued Ex.P4 Accident Register cum Wound Certificate. PW-10, the Tahsildar, issued Community Certificate Ex.P5. PW-11, the Sub-Inspector of Police, on receipt of complaint from Ramar, on 06.12.2004, registered the First Information Report in Crime No. 541 of 2004 under Sections 641, 323, 506(2) IPC and 3(1)(X) and 3(1)(XV) of SC/ST (PA) Act and thereafter, forwarded the complaint to Deputy Superintendent of Police, PW-12. PW-12 took up the case for investigation and went to the place of occurrence on 07.12.2004 and prepared observation mahazar and rough sketch and after examining the witnesses, arrested the accused persons on 07.12.2004 and after recording the confession of A1, he recovered the Aruval and thereafter, laid final report.
2.3. Before the trial Court, 12 witnesses were examined; Exs.P1 to P8 and MO 1 were marked. Based on the evidences, the trial Court has convicted the appellants/accused, as stated supra.
3. Learned Counsel for the appellants/accused would contend that absolutely there is no evidence to convict the appellants/accused under any of the Sections. The entire occurrence was doubtful. Except PW-1, other witnesses did not support the prosecution. The first informant also has not been examined. The judgment of the Trial Court is against law and submitted that the entire prosecution case is highly doubtful and therefore, he prays for allowing the present appeal.
4. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that PW-1 has clearly stated about the specific overtact. The Trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence and found the accused guilty. Hence, he prays for dismissal of the present appeal.
5. Having heard the learned Counsel on either side, this Court is of the view that the point for consideration is as to whether the prosecution proves the guilt of the appellants/ accused beyond reasonable doubt.
6. PW-1, in his evidence, has stated that there were some disputes between the two family over the allege
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
