The absence of independent witnesses undermines the prosecution's case under the SC/ST Act, confirming the necessity of public view for establishing caste-based offences.

JUDGMENT :

K.K. Ramakrishnan, J.

The appellant is the sole accused in S.C.No.142 of 2009, on the file of the learned Sessions Judge, (PCR Cases), Sivagangai, filed this appeal challenging the conviction and sentence imposed against him, in S.C.No.142 of 2009, dated 19.11.2018, by the learned Sessions Judge (PCR Cases), Sivagangai, and acquit the appellant.

2. The Brief facts of the prosecution case reads as follows:

Due to the land dispute between the appellant and the defacto complainant regarding the transfer the Puramboke land in the name of the defacto complainant, on 08.01.2007, at about 06.45 a.m., when the defacto complainant went to his farm near Pappakottai Road, the appellant waylaid the defacto complainant and the appellant is said to have abused him in filthy language by using his caste name and attacked him with Aruval and caused grievous injury on his body. Based on which, the defacto complainant gave a complaint before P.W.9. The same was registered in Crime No.3 of 2007, for the offences under Sections 341 and 324 of IPC and Sections 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes, Act, 1989 (hereinafter, for the sake of brevity, referred to as “SC/ST Act”). Thereafter, P.W.14 conducted the investigation and filed the final report. The same was taken on the file in P.R.C.No.13 of 2007 by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai.

3.On appearance of the appellant, copies of documents relied by the prosecution were furnished to the accused under section 207 of Cr.P.C. The learned Judicial Magistrate, Devakottai, found that the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act, is triable only by the Sessions Court and committed the case under Section 209(A) of Cr.P.C., to the learned District and Sessions Court, Madurai. Thereafter, the case was taken on file in special S.C.No.205 of 2007. Thereafter, the said case in Special S.C.No.205 of 2007 transferred from learned III Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai, to the learned District and Sessions Court, Sivagangai. The said learned District and Sessions Court, Sivagangai, has taken on file in S.C.No. 142 of 2009. Then, he framed necessary charges and questioned the accused. The accused denied the charges and pleaded not guilty and stood for trial.

4.To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.14 and exhibited 12 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.12 and produced 1 material object as M.O.1. Thereafter, the appellant was questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C proceedings after disclosing the incriminating evidence against him and he denied the same as false and thereafter, the case was posted for defence evidence. The accused neither produced any documents nor examined any witnesses on their side.

5. After considering the material adduced by the prosecution and also hearing the argument of the appellant and other accused, the learned trial Judge has passed the impugned order, dated 19.11.2018 and found the appellant guilty, convicted and sentenced him as detailed below:-

6. Challenging the above said conviction and sentence, the appellant has preferred the present Criminal Appeal.

7. This Court perused the records and the documents adduced by the prosecution and the grounds raised by the appellant and reply made by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the impugned judgment.

8. According to the appellant, due to the motive, a false complaint was foisted against him and the deposition of P.W.1 and P.W.2 that the appellant scolded him by using his caste name is a false one. He further submitted that the same was not in public view. To