The variations in witness testimonies regarding the specific language used in an abusive act can be significant in determining the intent to insult or intimidate a member of the Scheduled Caste, influencing the court's decision.

Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.

1. This Appeal is directed against the Judgment dated 25.03.2015 passed in S.T. Case No. 58 of 2013 (originally instituted as S.T. Case (SC & ST (POA) Act Case No. 02 of 2012) by the Special Judge SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, East Sikkim at Gangtok. By the impugned Judgment, the Appellant has been convicted u/S. 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “Special Act”) and Section 353 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo SI for six months and to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- with default sentence of SI for three months and SI for six months, respectively, with the direction to run the sentences concurrently.

2. The facts, briefly stated, are as under:-

2.1 Complainant, Bikash Lohar (PW-1) was working on the post of Junior Engineer (JE), Rural Management and Development Department (RM & DD), Government of Sikkim. He was in-charge of PMGSY Road (under construction) from Tareythang to Kerabari. Bikash Lohar (PW-1) was a member of ‘Kami’ caste recognised as Scheduled Caste in the State of Sikkim under the Constitution (Sikkim) Scheduled Tribe/Caste Order 1978. The work of construction and carpeting of the road was allotted to Santosh Kumar Agarwal (DW-2). The allegations are that on 27.04.2012, at about 10.30 AM, the Appellant used derogatory language against the complainant (PW-1) taking the name of his caste while the complainant (PW-1) was on official duty. Further allegations are that the Appellant, in fact, used criminal force to deter the complainant from discharge of his duty. All this happed at an open place within public view, which was witnessed by three eye witnesses, namely, Nima Lama (PW-2), Goma Chettri (PW-3) and Durga Devi (PW-4).

2.2 The complainant (PW-1) reported the matter to the concerned Police Station in writing vide Exhibit-1, on which a First Information Report, Exhibit-2, was registered u/Ss. 353/323 IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of the Special Act.

2.3 The learned Special Judge framed charges u/Ss. 3 (1) (x) of the Special Act and 353 IPC and relying on the testimonies of the above eye witnesses held that both the charges were proved against the Appellant. The Appellant, thus, was convicted and sentenced as above. Hence, this Appeal.

3. Mr. Ajay Rathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant, has firstly contended that the versions of all the eye witnesses are different on the alleged abusive/ derogatory language used by the Appellant. This creates doubt on their testimonies. If the Appellant, in fact, had abused the complainant (PW-1) by using particular word in a particular manner the evidence on that account would have been identical.

4. Mr. Karma Thinlay, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, has opposed the above contention of Mr. Rathi. His contention was that the very import of the language stated by all the eye witnesses would disclose that the Appellant had abused the complainant taking the name of his caste, which was sufficient to hold that he was liable for punishment u/S. 3 (1) (x) of the Special Act.

5. Let us see, what are the versions of the eye witnesses on this account? Bikash Lohar (PW-1) has deposed that after a short discussion with the Appellant regarding measurement of the work done, the Appellant caught hold of his neck and tried to assault him and ultimately assaulted him by hands. Thereafter, when he was returning back to his office the Appellant hold him and said “Kami Kaam garnu jandaina, Peon ma pani nahunay manchey, J.E. Ma kaam gari rako cha”. Same derogatory language, the complainant has mentioned in his written report (Exhibit-1). Nima Lama (PW-2) is the other eye witness. According to him, he was the Supervisor of RMDD looking after the said work of road construction. According to him, the Appellant abused the complainant by taking the name of his caste in the following manner “Kami, Daangra, Sarkhar lay toh lai J.E. Kasori banayo, Peon ko yogya pani