2026:CGHC:1603 NAFR SHYNA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR AJAY Digitally signed by SHYNA AJAY DN: cn=SHYNA AJAY, o=PERSONAL, st=Chhattisgarh, c=IN CRA No. 334 of 2005

1. Mohan Singh, son of Phool Singh Rajput, aged about 45 years.

2. Dilharan alias Nanhu, son of Bisahuram Manikpuri, aged about 30 years.

3. Udal Singh, son of Phool Singh Rajput, aged about 32 years.

All resident of Village Kanharkapa, P.S. Patharia, District Bilaspur (CG).

... Appellants(s)

versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through – P.S. Special Police Station ST. SC.

Welfare, Bilaspur (CG)

... Respondent(s)

For Appellants : Mr. Mohd. Azad Siddique, Advocate.

For Respondent/ : Mr. Prateek Tiwari, Panel Lawyer.

State SB:Hon’ble Mr. Justice Naresh Kumar Chandravanshi Judgment on Board

12/01/2026

1.

This Criminal Appeal under Section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellants/accused against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 4.4.2005 passed by the Special Judge (Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Bilaspur (CG) in Special Criminal Case No.63/02, whereby the learned Special Court, after holding the appellants guilty, convicted and sentenced them in the following manner:-

Conviction Sentence Under Section 294 To pay a fine of of the IPC Rs.200/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 7 days, each.

Under Section 3(1) RI for 6 months with fine (x) of the of Rs.200/-, in default of Scheduled Castes payment of fine to and Scheduled further undergo RI for 7 Tribes (Prevention days, each.

of Atrocities) Act

2.

Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 4.7.2002, Complainant Son Bai (PW-5) lodged a report stating therein that she belongs to Scheduled Caste Category and the appellants belong to the General Category. At the time of the incident, when appellant – Mohan Singh and his wife were returning from the agricultural field along with their buffalo, near a banyan tree in the village, the buffalo rubbed against the complainant’s grandson Anish @ Fukki (PW-8), whereupon he beat the buffalo with a wooden club. Thereafter, appellant Mohan Singh abused him in filthy language by naming his caste. When complainant Son Bai (PW-5) intervened, appellant Mohan Singh and other co-accused persons abused her in filthy language and by naming her caste. The FIR (Ex.P/2) was lodged by complainant Son Bai (PW-5), which was recorded in Roznamchasana. After enquiry, the FIR (Ex.P/2) was registered against the appellants for the offence under Sections 294 and 506-B of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (in short “the Atrocities Act”).

3.

After usual investigation, the charge-sheet for the offences under Sections 294, 506B, 323 of the IPC & 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act was filed against the appellants before the concerned jurisdictional Court.

4.

Learned Special Court framed the charges under Section 294, 506-B, 323/34 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act against the appellants, who abjured the guilt and entered into trial.

5.

In order to bring home the offence, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited 8 documents in its support. Statements of the accused/appellants were recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., in which they denied all the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the evidence of prosecution case and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the crime in question. The appellants have examined two witnesses namely Chait Ram (DW-

1) and Ramayan (DW-2) in their defence.

6.

After considering the evidence adduced by both the parties, the Special Court acquitted the appellants for the offence under Sections 506-B and 323/34 of the IPC. However, the concerned Court convicted them for the offence under Section 294 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the Atrocities Act, as has been mentioned in opening paragraph of this judgment. Against which, the instant appeal has been preferred by th