GORERAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) What is under challenge in this appeal is the judgment dated 17.02.2005 passed by Special Judge (Atrocities), Ambikapur, Sarguja in Special Case No.38/2004 holding the accused/appellant guilty under Section 3 (1) (x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as " Special Act ") and Sections 323 and 506 IPC. The accused/appellant has been slapped the sentence of RI for 6 months with fine of Rs.1000/- under the Special Act , and RI for 6 months and RI for 6 months for the offences under Sections 323 and 506 IPC respectively.

(2.) The case put-forth by the complainant herein is that at the relevant time he was the Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, Bhawarkhoh and that on 24.12.2002 when he was making payment of wages to the labourers about 50 in number in presence of the respectable villagers, accused/appellant herein happened to come there and started hurling filthy abuses, such ...[VARNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...Apart from hurling the aforementioned abuses the accused/appellant also threatened the complainant of life as a result of which he underwent humiliation and mental agony. When the Police did not proceed with the report lodged by him, the complainant filed complaint case before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambikapur where after conducting preliminary enquiry the offences under Sections 294 , 506-B , 323 IPC and Section 3 (1) (x) of the Special Act were registered against the accused/appellant. While committing the case vide order dated 05.06.2004 learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambikapur has mentioned therein that offences under Sections 294 , 323 and 506-B IPC & Section 3 (1) (x) of the Special Act prima facie appear to have made out against the accused/appellant.

(3.) After going through the material collected by the prosecution learned Court below found the allegations made by the complainant duly proved and convicted the accused/appellant under Section 3(1) (x) of the Special Act read with 294 and 323 & 506 IPC and imposed the sentence on him as referred to above. It is this judgment dated 17.02.2005 which is under challenge in this appeal.