Madhya Pradesh High Court
Nakul Kachhi vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 7 February, 2024
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI
ON THE 7 th OF FEBRUARY, 2024
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 528 of 2009
BETWEEN:-
NAKUL KACHHI S/O NATHTHU KUSHWAHA, AGED
ABOUT 20 YEARS, VILL. KUNJWAAN , PS KOTWALI,
PANNA DISTT. PANNA(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....APPELLANT
(BY SHRI P.C. GAHARWAR ADVOCATE FOR THE APPELLANT)
AND
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH PS ADIM
JATI KALYAN PANNA, DISTT. PANNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENT/STATE
(BY MS. SEEMA SAHU - PANEL LAWYER)
Th is appeal coming on for hearing this day, t h e court passed the
following:
JUDGEMENT
This criminal appeal under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973 is filed by the appellant being aggrieved of the judgment dated
20/2/2009 passed by the learned Special Judge (Atrocities), Panna in Special
case No.26/2008, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 3(1)
(11) of the Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,
1989 (hereinafter referred to as the ''SC/ST Act'') and sentenced to Rigorous
Imprisonment for six months with fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment
of fine, rigorous imprisonment for one month was also directed.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that prosecution has failed
to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, complainant had produced her
caste certificate (Ex.P/4), which is issued by the Sarpanch and Sarpanch is not
the competent authority to issue Caste Certificate, Caste Certificate is to be
issued either by the Tehsildar or by the Sub Divisional Officer, as the case may
be and thus, in absence of Caste Certificate being proved, basic ingredients of
the case that complainant belongs to Scheduled Caste community, stood
disproved and, therefore, there could not have been any conviction under
Section 3(1)(11) of the SC/ST Act.
3. This submission is not opposed by learned Panel Lawyer for the
respondent-State.
4. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the record
and in view of the facts that complainant could not produce any cogent
evidence to prove her caste, caste certificate issued by competent authority.
The conviction of the appellant under Section 3(1)(11) of the SC/ST Act,
cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
5. In Chalaniya Dheemar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, ILR 2012 MP
189, it is held that no caste certificate of any competent authority to that effect
was produced or proved before the Court and, therefore, conviction cannot be
maintained under the provisions of Prevention of Atrocities Act in absence of
legal evidence in the Court.
6. In Pillu Alias Pyarelal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh ILR, 2012 MP
1309, it is held that if prosecution fails to prove the caste of victim by any
cogent and reliable document issued by the competent authority then mere oral
deposition of witness would not deem to be proved.
7. Thus, since Sarpanch is admittedly not a competent authority to issue
caste certificate and no caste certificate issued by competent authority is made
available on record, conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 3(1)
(11) of the SC/ST Act cannot be affirmed.
8. In the result, the appellant/accused is acquitted of U/S 3(1)(xi) SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities) Act. Conviction and sentence under that offence is
set aside. Amount of fine, if deposited, be returned to him. Consequently, the
order of Trial Court regarding compensation is also set aside.
9. The appellant is on bail, his personal bond and bail bond be discharged.
10. In above terms, this criminal appeal is partly allowed and disposed of.
11. Record of the trial Court be sent back.
(RAJENDRA KUMAR VANI)
JUDGE
m/-
