The prosecution must prove the caste status of the accused, which the trial Court found was not conclusively established to apply SCs & STs (POA) Act.

JUDGMENT :

The present criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant/

complainant aggrieved by the judgment dated 29.01.2014 in Special SC No.01 of 2011 on the file of the learned Special Judge for Trial of Offences under SCs & STs (POA) Act-cum-VI Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Secunderabad wherein and whereby the said Court while acquitting the accused/2^nd respondent for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of SCs & STs (POA) Act found him guilty for the offence punishable under Section 506 Part-I of IPC, convicted under Section 235(2) of Cr.P.C., and sentenced him to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months.

2. Heard Sri K.Rama Subba Rao learned counsel for the appellant, Sri E.Ganesh, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent No.1/State and Sri Y.Subhash, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.

3. The brief facts of the case are that on the evening of

13.11.2010 at around 18-30 hours, while the complainant Gunti Srikanth/appellant/PW1 was present at his tent house along with his elder brother Gunti Mallikarjun/PW2 and friends Bommerla Suresh/PW3 and Mohammed Azmath, the accused/D.Arun Kumar/2^nd respondent herein, in a drunken state, trespassed into the premises holding two empty beer bottles. He began abusing the appellant, PW2 and PW3 by referring to their caste and using derogatory language, broke the bottles, kicked the table and chair and issued serious threats to them, further using obscene language. When they questioned his behavior, the 2nd respondent escalated the situation by continuing his verbal assault, creating panic among those present. PW4, who tried to pacify the 2^nd respondent, was also abused with filthy language. The 2^nd respondent then pelted a stone at the house of PW 7. Alarmed, his wife called PW7, who arrived shortly and witnessed the continued abuse. The accused threatened PW 7, demanding that PWs 1 and 2 vacate the Malgi or face dire consequences. Eventually, the wives of the 2^nd respondent arrived and took him back into their house. The incident was also witnessed by PW

5, Sri Raju Yadav and others.

4. Basing on the above facts, the appellant lodged a complaint on 14.11.2010 with the police. Accordingly, FIR No.433 of 2010 was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3(1)(x) of SCs & STs POA Act and Sections 323 and 506 of IPC against the 2^nd respondent/accused. Upon completion of investigation, the police laid charge-sheet against the accused alleging that the accused abused PWs.1 to 3 by naming their caste and also threatened with dire consequences and thereby committed the offences under Sections 3(1)(x) of SCs & STs (POA) Act and 323 and 506 of IPC. The trial Court took cognizance of the offences under Sections 3(1)(x) of SCs & STs (POA) Act and 506 of IPC and upon completion of procedural formalities, commenced the trial, during which PWs.1 to 11 were examined and Exs.P1 to P9 were marked on behalf of the prosecution. The 2^nd respondent/accused denied the prosecution’s allegations and claimed that being a member of a Scheduled Caste, the provisions of the SCs and STs (POA) Act were not applicable to him. In support of his defence, the accused examined DWs.1 to 3 and marked Exs.D1 to D7. Upon considering the evidence adduced on either side, the trial Court while acquitting the accused for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of SCs & STs (POA) Act found the accused guilty for the offence under Section 506 Part-I of IPC, convicted him and sentenced, as stated above.

5. Aggrieved by the trial Court’s decision acquitting the 2^nd respondent/accused of the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs & STs (POA) Act, the de-facto complainant/appellant preferred the present crimina