Back
HIRDESH
Brijendra Kumar Rajak – Appellant
Versus
State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Hirdesh, J.
This appeal has been filed by the appellant under section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code against the judgment dated 27-9-2003 passed in the Special Case No. 221/2002 by Special Judge, Tikamgarh.
2. By the impugned judgment the trial Court has convicted the appellant under section 509 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo SI for 6 months, under section 451 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo RI for one year and fine of Rs. 250/-, under section 506-B of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo SI for six months and under section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act and sentenced to undergo RI for one year with fine of Rs. 250/-, with default stipulation.
3. Brief facts of the prosecution story are that on 30-6-2002 at 4:00 pm prosecutrix was inside the house on the Bararnda. Her mother Munni Bai and brother Janki were sitting opposite the house under the Neam tree on the platform and elder brother was inside the house. At that time appellant came to her house and shows Rs. 10/- to her and made eye to her and says to go with him. She called her brother and then appellant used filthy language. Thereafter, other relatives of the pros
Convictions under the SC/ST Act require proof of caste status, and all elements of IPC offenses must be established beyond reasonable doubt.
The court clarified the requirements for conviction under the SCST Act versus IPC Section 354, emphasizing necessary evidence of intent tied to caste status for SCST convictions.
Criminal Law - Offence of Assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty - Appeal against conviction - Evidence of prosecutrix is also corroborated by PW-4 Dr. who examined her....
Prosecution must provide valid documentary evidence to prove caste under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act; mere oral testimony is insufficient.
The exemplification of evidential requirements under the SCST Act highlights that mere membership to a scheduled category does not automatically substantiate charges without compelling evidence.
Procedural violations in criminal investigations can lead to the reversal of convictions under special laws protecting marginalized communities.
Conviction under special provisions requires definitive evidence of caste status, which was lacking; however, guilt under general statutes was established.
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.
Conviction under SC/ST Act requires evidence of intent related to caste, which was lacking; guilty of IPC Section 354 for outraging modesty.
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
