Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Prem Raj vs State on 12 May, 2022
Bench: Pushpendra Singh Bhati
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 45/1994
Prem Raj
----Appellant
Versus
State
----Respondent
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Shubham Modi
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S.K. Bhati, PP
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI
Judgment
12/05/2022
This criminal appeal under Section 374 Cr.P.C. has been
preferred claiming the following reliefs:
"It is therefore most respectfully prayed that appeal of the
appellant may kindly be allowed and the judgment dated
15.1.94 passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Caste &
Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities), Jodhpur may
kindly be quashed and set aside to the extent of sentence
passed by him and the appellant may kindly be acquitted
from the charges levelled against him."
Learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out that an
altercation happened on 13.05.1991 when at Railway Station
Samdari, ten students went for drinking water at a public water
hut (Pyau). It is alleged that the present appellant, a teacher,
objected to the students taking water from the water hut, as it
belonged to the higher caste and they belonged to Scheduled
Caste.
(Downloaded on 16/05/2022 at 08:36:06 PM)
(2 of 3) [CRLA-45/1994]
Learned counsel further submits that the appellant is a
teacher and the boys have created a ruckus at the water hut and
his intervention has resulted into the present FIR.
Learned counsel has taken this Court towards the statements
rendered by the prosecution witnesses in the capacity of PW-1,
PW-6, PW-7 & PW-11. PW-1, as being friends of the complainant,
have deposed that his friend was not stopped from drinking water
in front of them, in his examination. Thereafter, PW-6 has stated
that the students were asked to stand in a queue to drink water.
Learned counsel further submits that the evidence rendered
by PW-7 is critical to the facts of the case because he is a neutral
person and is operating the water hut and in his deposition, he
states that when the students came in and started creating
ruckus, he took away the Lota from the water hut. PW-7 has
further deposed that the students have right to enter into the
water hut whereas he requested them to stand in queue and wait
for their turn to drink the water, but the boys snatched away the
Lota. He also deposed that in his water hut being operated by him,
everybody from all religions or castes were allowed to have water,
and therefore, there is no question of any kind of prejudice having
being created to the students.
Learned counsel has thereafter, taken this Court towards the
statement rendered by PW-11, the friend of the complainant, who
has accepted in his cross-examination that the old man, who was
operating the water hut, told him not to come inside the water hut
and to stand in the queue for their turn, which corroborates the
statement rendered by PW-7.
Learned Public Prosecutor opposes the submissions.
(Downloaded on 16/05/2022 at 08:36:06 PM)
(3 of 3) [CRLA-45/1994]
This Court, on seeing the record of the case and hearing the
submissions made, is of the firm opinion that the PW-7, who was a
water hut operator and a neutral man, aged 80 years and himself
not being attached to any of the parties, has given the version as
an altercation having been created by the students, while breaking
the queue and trying to enter into the water hut and to snatch
away the Lota of the water. The same is corroborated by PW-11,
though he was the friend of the complainant and he has stood by
the version of the complainant except for the part narrated above,
which corroborates the statement rendered by PW-7. The version
given by the friend of the complainant, PW-11, is more aggravated
than that of complainant. The learned trial court faltered in not
giving proper credence to PW-7 along with other parts of the
record.
With the aforesaid observations, the present criminal appeal
is allowed. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence
dated 14.01.1994 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST
(Prevention of Atrocities), Jodhpur in Sessions Case No.72/1993 is
quashed and set aside. The appellant is acquitted of the charges
levelled against him. He is on bail. He need not surrender. His bail
bonds stand discharged accordingly.
All pending applications stand disposed of. The record of the
learned trial court be sent back forthwith.
(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI), J.
47-Zeeshan
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
