Non-compliance with procedural safeguards in investigating offenses under the SC/ST Act leads to vitiation of proceedings and entitlement to acquittal, regardless of evidence of offense.

Judgment :

S.S. Mishra, J.

The present Criminal Appeal filed by the appellant under Section 374 (2) of Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.06.2000 passed by the learned Special Judge, Mayurbhanj, Baripada in T.C. No. 6 of 1999 (G.R. Case No. 399 of 1998), whereby the learned trial Court has convicted the appellant under Section 294 of IPC read with Section 3 (1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The learned trial court sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for 15 days for commission of offence under Section 294 IPC and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for six months and to pay a fine of Rs.100/-, in default, to undergo R.I. for 15 days for commission of offence under Section 3 (1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

2. Heard Mr. Tirth Kumar Sahu, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant and Mr. S.J. Mohanty, learned counsel for the State.

3. This appeal is pending since 2000. When the matter was called up, none appeared for the appellant consistently. Therefore, on 08.07.2025, Mr. Tirth Kumar Sahu was appointed as Amicus Curiae to assist the Court.

4. Argument was heard on 22.07.2025 and the parties were directed to file their written notes of submission. Pursuant thereto, the written notes of submission has been filed by Mr. Tirth Kumar Sahu, learned Amicus Curiae on 24.07.2025.

5. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 25.04.1998 at about 1.30 P.M. the staff meeting was going on in Rasgovindapur Block Office under the Chairmanship of the informant, Saroj Kumar Sethy, the then Block Development Officer of Rasagovindapur Block. In that meeting, P.Ws.1, 2, 3, 4 and other members of the Block Office staff were present. The accused was working as Stipendary Engineer in Rasagovindapur Block Office and he had also attended the staff meeting. The informant Saroj Kumar Sethy, who presided over the staff meeting is 'Dhoba' by caste and he is a member of the Scheduled Caste. The accused belongs to General Caste. In course of the staff meeting, the accused abused the informant by saying “SHALA DHOBAR AME KOANA DHARICHHE”. Thereafter, the informant felt humiliated and his prestige was at stake in the meeting. On that day, after the meeting was over, the informant lodged the written report at Rasagovindapur Police Station.

6. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, Rasagovindapur P.S. Case No. 34 dated 25.04.1998 was registered for the offence punishable under Sections 294 of IPC read with Section 3(1) (x) of SC & ST (PoA) Act, 1989. After investigation, charge sheet was filed and then charges were framed against the appellant for the offences as mentioned above and on his stance of denial, he was put to trial.

7. The prosecution in order to bring home the charges, examined as many as six witnesses. The defence examined none and took a stand of complete denial and claimed trial. P.W.5, was the informant; P.Ws. 1, 2, 3 and 4 were the eye witnesses; and P.W.6 was the Investigating Officer of the present case.

8. Taking into consideration the entire evidence on record brought by the prosecution through the six witnesses and other documents, the learned trial court framed two questions for determination:-

“(i) Whether the accused uttered obscene words in a public place to the annoyance of informant Saroj Kumar Sethy at the time of occurrence; and

(ii) Whether the accused intentionally insulted or intimidated with intent to humiliate informant Saroj Kumar S