Knowledge of the victim's caste is not required for conviction under Section 3(2)(4) of the SC/ST Act.

1. This appeal is preferred by the appellants - accused being aggrieved by the judgment dated 10-5-1999 delivered by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dabra, District Gwalior in Sessions Trial No. 47/1998, whereby the Sessions Court has convicted the present appellants for commission of offence under S.436 read with S.34,1. P. C. and sentenced to undergo five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default of payment of fine, they are directed to undergo further one year's rigorous imprisonment. The appellants are also convicted by the impugned judgment for commission of offence under S.3(2)(4) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 5,000/- each, in default of payment of fine they are directed to undergo further one year R. I.

2. During the pendency of this appeal, appellant No. 2 Santo alias Satish died, hence his appeal stood abated.

3. As per the prosecution case, in the intervening night of 4th and 5th March, 1998 complainant - Babulal Jatav was sleeping in his house with his family after taking food. He was awoken by his wife Leelavati. Both of them came out and saw accused Lakke Pandit and Satto Pandit ablazing their huts (Madaiya). Bhupendra Pandit was standing on the ground. They asked them as to what they are doing; whereupon the accused threatened them and after abusing they ran away. Complainant - Babulal shouted, on which persons residing in nearby colony came to the spot. By that time three huts of the complainant were burnt.

4. Three four days prior to the present incident, at about 11:00 in the night accused Lakke Pandit had gone to the house of the complainant and pushed the door by leg. However, the door could not open. Next day, complainant and his wife went to the house of Lakke Pandit, where they met Lakke Pandit and his father Gauri Shankar. They made complaint to Gauri Shankar about the incident. On that Gauri Shankar abused them with reference to their caste and threatened to set their huts ablaze. Complainant - Babulal and his wife returned back to their house. Due to this enmity, Gauri Shankar got the house set at fire with the help of his sons Lakke, Satto and Bhupendra. Due to the fire, household goods, cereals, husk, table fan, oil and cash etc. had burnt.

5. On the report lodged by the complainant Crime No. 21/98 was registered and the police after investigation filed challan against the accused. The matter was committed to the Sessions Court and the Sessions Court framed charge against the accused for commission of offence under S.436 in alternative 436/34 of I. P. C. and S.3(2)(4) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention and Atrocities) Act, 1989. The Sessions Court after recording the evidence and appreciating the same convicted the accused as aforesaid, hence this appeal.

6. Shri Shailendra Singh, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the findings arrived at by the Sessions Court are not supported by the evidence on record, and therefore, order of conviction deserves to be set aside. It is contended that even assuming that offence is proved, punishment awarded by the Sessions Court is on higher side. It is further contended that appellant No. 3 Lakke alias Lokendra is in custody for more than 10 years, hence lenient view should be taken.

7. On the other hand, Mohd. Irshad, learned counsel for the respondent/State supported the impugned judgment. He submits that the Sessions Court has not committed an illegality in convicting the pr