Rangu Damodar, vs The State Of A.P., Rep By Pp.,
2022 Latest Caselaw 3780 Tel

               HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

               CRIMINAL APPEAL No.101 OF 2009
JUDGMENT:

1. The appellant is convicted for the offence under Section

3(1)(x) of SCs & STs (POA) Act, 1989 and sentenced to undergo

SI for a period of six months and also convicted and sentenced

to undergo for the charge under Section 324 of IPC, vide

judgment dated 06.01.2009 in S.C.No.72 of 2007 by the

Special Sessions Judge for trial of Cases under SC/ST (POA)

Act, at Khammam. Aggrieved by the same, present appeal is

filed.

2. The case of P.W.1 is that he belongs to Scheduled Caste

community and the appellant is resident of his village. In the

year 2005 at about 7.30 or 8.00 p.m, while P.W.1 was

returning from his land and reached near the panshop in the

village, at that point of time, the accused beat P.W.1 and

abused in the name of caste. Immediately other persons

reached the scene. P.W.1 went and lodged Ex.P1 complaint,

dated 23.09.2005.

3. The prosecution examined P.Ws.2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 who are

the villagers. However, none of them supported the

prosecution case. P.W.2 is the house owner, who is not

witness to the incident. PWs.4 and 5 who are villagers turned

hostile to the prosecution case and P.Ws.6 and 7 were

panchas to seizure and confession, however, both of them

turned hostile to the prosecution case. As seen from the

complaint Ex.P1, P.W.1 narrated that there were disputes

since long regarding boundaries in the land.

4. As per complaint, on 22.09.2005 in the morning around

10.00 a.m, the accused and others abused them in the name

of caste and went away. Again when P.W.1 went to the cool

drink shop to buy boost packet, it is alleged that suddenly the

appellant attacked him with Manchampatti (one of the legs of

the cot). However, as seen from the examination in the court,

P.W.1 has not narrated anything about the previous day

instance or anything to do with the boundary dispute.

5. In the back ground of P.W.1 disowning any previous

enmity and any incident that occurred prior to 23.09.2005,

the version about abusing in the name of case cannot be

believed as stated before the Court, for the reason of

suppressing the incidents. The wording, which was stated in

the Court does not find place in the complaint. For the said

reason, the conviction under Section 3(1)(x) of SCs & STs

(POA) Act is liable to be set aside.

6. However, P.W.1 was examined by P.W.10, the Doctor,

who found three injuries viz., i) small abrasion over the elbow;

ii) Small swelling over tip of left shoulder; iii) small swelling

with tenderness and that the said injuries were found to be

simple in nature. In the said circumstances, the conviction

recorded under Section 324 IPC is reduced to the period

already undergone.

7. In the result, the conviction recorded by the trial Court

under Section 3(1)(x) of SCs & STs (POA) Act is set aside and

the conviction recorded under Section 324 of IPC is confirmed.

However, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced to the

period already undergone.

8. With the above modification, this Criminal Appeal is

partly allowed. Since the accused is on bail, his bail stands

cancelled. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous applications, if

any, shall stand closed.

__________________ K.SURENDER, J Date: 18.07.2022 kvs

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER

CRIMINAL APPEAL No.101 OF 2009

Date: 18.07.2022.

kvs