SURENDRA DUBEY Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been preferred under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 26.7.2006 passed in Special Case No.17 of 2005 by the Special Judge under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (henceforth 'the Act of 1989'), Rajnandgaon convicting the Petitioner/accused under Sections 294 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him for each of the offences to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 month and to pay fine of Rs.100/- with default stipulation.

(2.) The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 10.2.2005, Complainant Mahesh (PW1) had gone to Village Dongargaon from his Village Matiya for repairing of his torch. At about 10:00 a.m., he was getting his torch repaired at the shop of Parakh Electricals by Shopkeeper Pradeep. At that time, he saw that Mahendra Dubey (acquitted accused) was beating Shivdayal (PW6). Abusing, he was taking Shivdayal (PW6) away with him. When Complainant Mahesh (PW1) along with Ankalu (PW4) tried to intervene, Mahendra Dubey caught him also and abusing, beat him. At that time, brothers of Mahendra Dubey, namely, Narendra Dubey (other acquitted accused) and Surendra Dubey (the present Petitioner) also came there and they also abusing, beat Complainant Mahesh (PW1). The incident was seen by Ankalu (PW4), Bhaggu Marar (not examined) and Sakendra (not examined). Complainant Mahesh (PW1), running, went to home and narrated the incident to his wife and thereafter went to Police Station Dongargaon and lodged First Information Report (Ex.P1). After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed under Sections 294, 323, 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Act of 1989 against present accused/Petitioner Surendra Dubey and other two acquitted accused Mahendra Dubey and Narendra Dubey. Charges were framed against them accordingly.

(3.) So as to hold Surendra Dubey, Mahendra Dubey and Narendra Dubey guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. Statements of the three accused persons were also recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in which they denied the guilt and pleaded their innocence and false implication in the case. The accused persons also examined 4 witnesses in their defence.