Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.C.BEHERA
Sibananda @ Subanath Bhoi – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. defendant's denial and defense strategy (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 9) |
| 3. court's examination of prosecution evidence (Para 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. essential elements for conviction under act (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. conclusion and acquittal of the appellant (Para 20) |
JUDGMENT :
A.C. Behera, J.
This Criminal Appeal has been preferred by the Appellant against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against him (Appellant) by the learned Special Judge-cum-Sessions Judge, Balangir on 29th April 1995 in G.R. Case No. 71 of 1992 arising out of Tureikela P.S. Case No. 18 of 1992, wherein, he (Appellant) was convicted U/s 3(1)(xi) of the S.C. & S.T. (P.A.) Act, 1989 and was sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- in default to undergo R.I. for six months.
2. The Appellant was the sole accused before the learned Trial Court below in G.R. Case No.71 of 1992.
3. The projected case of the prosecution during trial against the accused was that, on 14.04.1992, at about 11 a.m., while the daughter of the informant, who was reading in class-VI was returning from the school, on her way near Ha
Prosecution must prove both victim's S.C./S.T. status and the accused's non-S.C./S.T. status to sustain a conviction under the S.C. & S.T. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
The court held that evidence must establish exploitation and dominance to uphold convictions under the S.C. & S.T. Act; mere consent and intimacy do not satisfy this requirement.
Prosecution must establish the accused is not a member of SC/ST to prove an offence under the SC/ST Act; absence of such evidence voids the conviction under the Act.
Credible evidence of caste identity is essential to establish an offence under the SC & ST (PoA) Act; without it, prosecution fails.
For conviction under the SC/ST Act, prosecution must prove both caste identity and an intent to harm due to that identity; lack of such proof invalidates the charge.
Conviction under the SC/ST Act requires proof of the complainant's caste status, which was not provided, leading to the appeal's success.
The conviction for rape was quashed due to unreliable victim testimony, lack of corroborative evidence, and unexplained delay in FIR lodging.
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
