The High Court of Jharkhand while setting aside the conviction under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act observed that there is no material to show that any premeditated assault took place by any weapon and whatever happened was on the spur of the moment and therefore requisite intention to make out the offence will not be made out.
Brief Facts:
The present appeal has been filed against the conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial court, whereby it convicted the appellants for six months for the offence under Sections 341, 323, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for one year for the offence under Section 3 (1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Contentions of the Appellant:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant contended that there had been an inordinate delay in filing the complaint. The incident took place on 30.04.2003 as per the prosecution case, whereas from the endorsement of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate on the complainant it appears that it was forwarded for the FIR being registered on 14.07.2003. There is an inordinate delay of three months in Filing F.I.R., without any explanation for the delay. It was further submitted that the complaint is completely silent about the name of the brother of the complainant with whom the initial incident took place on the dispute for taking water and further minor altercation over taking water from the public tap has been blown out of proportion to allege offence under the provision of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to make the offence serious in nature.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent defended the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence.
Observations of the Court:
The court observed that an offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 will not be made out in the present case, as a minor altercation took place in a dispute between two ladies in taking water from a public bore-well and further there is not a shred of the document in support of any injury sustained by anyone, although tall claims have been made regarding hospitalization and on a combined reading of evidence it appears that the incidence was confined to the exchange of verbal abuse and scuffle between both sides.
Further, the court stated that there is no material to show that any premeditated assault took place by any weapon and whatever happened was on the spur of the moment and therefore requisite intention to make out the offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 will not be made out. The said offence is intended for cases where the members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe are subjected to humiliation by any means, on account of their caste status. The Act was meant to cover all disputes between a member of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe and others and thus the judgment of conviction and sentence passed under the Special Act is not sustainable.
The court concluded that in the present case, there are material contradictions that have not been supported by independent witnesses and the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond the shadow of all reasonable and probable doubt.
The decision of the Court:
The court set aside the conviction and allowed the appeal.
Case Title: Bachchu Yadav and anr. vs. State of Jharkhand
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Case No.: Cr. Appeal (S.J.) No. 598 of 2012
Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. Mukesh Bihari Lal
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Fahad Allam
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
