STATE OF CHHATTISGARH Vs. LAKHAN LAL SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant-State has preferred this acquittal appeal challenging the judgment of acquittal passed by Special Sessions Judge (Atrocity), Korba in Special Sessions Trial No.46/2009 on 4/7/2011, whereby learned trial Court acquitted the respondents from charges under Ss. 341, 294, 506-II, 323/34 of Indian Penal Code and Ss. 3(i)(x) of Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, 'the Act of 1989').

(2.) Facts relevant for disposal of appeal are that Santram Chouhan lodged report to the concerned Police Station making allegations that on 1/7/2009 he alongwith his brother and sister (Santkumar Chouhan and Sakuntala) was returning back from agriculture field. When he reached in front of house of respondents, they stopped him and started abusing and assaulting him by means of club. When his brother and sister intervened, respondents abused and assaulted them also. Respondents abused them by their caste also. Santram Chouhan (complainant) was dragged inside house of respondents and when he became unconscious, he was thrown out of house. Based on complaint, FIR was registered against respondents for commission of aforementioned offences. Complainant, his brother and sister were sent for medical examination. Injuries suffered by them were found to be simple in nature. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against respondents. After conclusion of trial, respondents were acquitted from all the charges.

(3.) Learned counsel for appellant/State submits that trial Court has not appreciated the evidence available on record in proper manner and committed error in acquitting respondents. Trial Court considering minor omissions and contractions have disbelieved other evidence available on record. Trial Court further erred in considering the story of previous enmity narrated in defence. From the evidence of complainant and their witnesses, it is proved that respondents have assaulted complainant, his brother and sister due to which they suffered injuries. They were also abused by respondents by their caste. Hence, impugned judgment of acquittal passed by trial Court is not sustainable and is liable to be set aside.