SHIVANNA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned State Public Prosecutor. The appellants were the accused before the trial court in the following circumstances: - It is the case of the prosecution that on 31.3.2013, at about 8 p.m. when PWs. 1 and 2 were watching the Annual Day Function of Shri Shivashakthi Education Institute, the accused are said to have questioned about his presence and abused them as "Holeya nanna makkala" and so saying, accused No. 1 had stamped PW. 1 with his slippered foot and others had assaulted them with their hands and as a result of which, they had suffered injuries. PWs. 1 and 2 therefore, after obtaining medical treatment, had lodged a complaint as regards the alleged offences. It is on that basis that a case was registered for offences punishable under sections 143, 324, 323 read with 149 of the IPC and under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'SC and ST Act', for brevity). After further proceedings, the accused were charge -sheeted and they having pleaded not guilty and having claimed to be tried, the prosecution had examined nine witnesses and marked several documents and material objects. After recording the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Hereinafter referred to as the 'Cr.P.C.' for brevity) and after hearing the parties, the court below had framed the following point for consideration: - Whether the prosecution proved the allegations against the accused 1 to 6 punishable under Sections 143, 324, 323 read with 149 Indian Penal Code, and Section 3(1)(x) of SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 beyond reasonable doubt? The court below held the above point in the negative and convicted and sentenced the appellants to undergo simple imprisonment for two years with fine of Rs. 500/ - each for the offence punishable under section 3(1)(x) of the SC and ST Act and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 323 of the IPC and to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year with fine of Rs. 500/ - each for the offence punishable under Section 324 of the IPC. It is that which is under challenge in the present appeal.

(2.) THE learned Counsel for the appellants would point out that there was a concerted effort on the part of the group of persons belonging to the Scheduled Caste in the Gummanahalli village for the past three years prior to the incident, of bringing cases against the accused on allegations of offences punishable under the SC and ST Act as well as under other provisions of the IPC. This is evident from the admitted circumstance that PW. 1 has categorically admitted that subsequent to the filing of the present case on hand, he had also lodged yet another case against the present accused and forty others in Special Case No. 74/2003. The learned Counsel for the appellant would submit that the filing of such a case is part of the record as recorded in the deposition of PW. 1. And insofar as Special Case No. 74/2003 is concerned, it has resulted in the acquittal of the accused. It is also on record therein, as stated by the very PW. 1, that there were no instances of any such abuse with reference to the caste of the complainant and others. Therefore, it would be evident that the present case was one more in the light of cases brought against the accused as a group only to bring a false case against them. Even otherwise, the learned Counsel would draw attention to the record to demonstrate that for an offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC and ST Act, it was incumbent on the prosecution to have established that the accused had intentionally insulted or intimidated, with an intent to humiliate the complainant in any place within public view. The allegation against the present appellants was to the effect that they had used derogatory language with reference to the caste of the complainant and other. To establish this, it was necessary that the witnesses in support of the prosecution ought to have corroborated the evidence of the others with reference to the particular language that was used in order to bring home the charge. The learned Counsel would draw attention to the testimony of each of the witnesses to point out that apart from the vague allegation that there was derogatory reference to the caste of the complainant and others, there is no indication of the exact language that was used by each of the accused. There is also no reference as to which of the accused used which expression. Therefore, the court below having convicted all the accused notwithstanding that there was no reference to any particular accused having used any particular language, the same results in a miscarriage of justice and is without any basis. It is also pointed out that the so called assault and the injuries suffered is not evidenced by any undisputable medical record. The injuries were of trivial in nature as it was only discolouration of the skin and contusions allegedly found on PW. 1 and this cannot be attributed to any assault in the absence of specific reference to the particular accused who had used particular means to cause such injuries. In the absence of particulars against each of the accused with reference to the overt acts committed by them, the court below could not have proceeded on generalities on the general allegations made against all the accused, in holding that the charges have been proved beyond all reasonable doubt. It is in this vein that the leaned Counsel would take this court through the evidence on record to demonstrate that the appellants being visited with serious punishment of imprisonment is not justified by the evidence or the findings that are arrived at by the court below. The learned Counsel would therefore seek acquittal of the accused.