1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.2.2005 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Guna (M.P.), in Special Case No. 307/2002, convicting present appellant/accused for the offence punishable under section 456 of IPC and also under section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities), Act 1989, for brevity the Act, for six months R.I. with a fine of Rs. 500/- and again six months R.I. with a fine of Rs. 1,000/-, respectively with default stipulations.

2. The prosecution versions during trial is as follows :

The prosecutrix lodged the report at Police Station Mungaoli to the effect that on 13.10.2002 when she was sleeping in night in the room along with family members, after bolting the door of the room from inside, at around 1 a.m the accused-appellant entered the house after opening the door. Thereafter, he caught hold of her hands and tried to outrage her modesty. When she raised hue and cry, her husband who was also sleeping nearby woke up. On raising hue and cry, persons of the vicinity collected there. On the report, FIR as per Ex.P/1 was lodged by the police. Crime No. 317/2002 was registered for offences punishable under sections 456, 354 of IPC as well as section 3(1)(xi) of the Act. After completion of investigation charge-sheet was filed before the Court competent jurisdiction.

3. The appellant/accused pleaded not guilty. The prosecution in order to bring home the charges, examined prosecutrix (PW1), Biharihal, husband (PW2), Durgaprasad (PW3), Munnalal (PW4) and the I.O. Smt. Suman Gurjar (PW5) and produced documentary evidence. The appellant denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses by adducing evidence of DW1 Ramsajiwan and DW2 Champalal. In sum and substance, his defence was one of total denial and that of false implication.

4. After hearing the learned counsel appearing on both sides and on assessment of oral as well as documentary evidence, the learned Special Judge by the judgment under appeal held that the evidence on record satisfactorily established that the prosecution has proved the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under section 456 of IPC and section 3(1)(xi) of the Act, and accordingly convicted and sentenced the appellant, as aforesaid.

5. Aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the appellant has filed the present appeal.

6. Learned counsel for the rival parties are heard and the record of the trial Court is also perused.

7. With regard to the conviction recorded for the offence punishable under section 3(1)(xi) of the Act, it is seen from the record that the prosecution attempted to prove the foundational ingredients of the victim being a member of the SC and ST community by caste certificate issued by the Councillor Smt. Vinita Jain of Ward No.2 of Nagar Panchayat Mungaoli, dated 16.10.2002, Ex.P-5, which was sought to be proved by the Investigating Officer Smt. Suman Gurjar (PW5).

8. The said certificate is of no avail to the prosecution as it has not been issued by the competent authority. After the decision of the apex Court in the case of Ku. Madhuri Patil v. Addl. Commissioner Tribal Development, reported in AIR 1995 SC 94, laying down the forum and procedure for assailing caste/tribe status, detailed instructions have been issued by the State of M.P. vesting the power of issuance of caste/tribe certificate upon Revenue Officer not below the rank of Deputy Collector as mandated by rule 7 of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995 (for short, 'Rules') framed by the Central Government. The Councillor of Nagar Panchayat has no authority to issue such certificate and therefore the said certificate is of no avail to the prosecution for establishing that the victim was a member of the SC/ST Community. As such, the foundational ingredients of offence under section 3(1)(xi) of the Ac