REKHA AGGARWAL & ANR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE present revision is being preferred to challenge the impugned order of charge dated 29.01.2005 passed by the learned ASJ whereby the learned ASJ ordered framing of charges under section 3(1) (x) of the SC & ST Act.

(2.) THE facts necessitating the present revision petition are that, on a complaint lodged by Vinod Kumar, Umesh Kumar, Surender Chander, Harpal Singh and Umashankar in P.S. Kalkaji, New Delhi a case under section 3(1) (x) of the SC & ST Act was sought to be lodged wherein it was alleged that accused Rekha Aggarwal and accountant R.P. Malhotra hurled caste related remarks against the complainants. The complainants stated that on 14.09.2001, accused Rekha Aggarwal and R.P. Malhotra called their colleague Harpal from his duty and asked him to emulate a cock and when he refused to do so he was subsequently beaten by R.P. Malhotra. He also abused the complainant Harpal and when the other complainant went to save Harpal, they were also abused by saying that saalo, churo, chamaro, bhangiyo tumahari okat gandagi (mella) uthana hai. Tum log hamare pass kya karne aagaye and pushed them out of the chamber.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the ingredients of the section 3 (1) (x) of the Act which require that the act to constitute an offence under this section it has to be proved that the caste based remarks were made in "public view" as contemplated in the section. The counsel for the petitioner relies upon the judgment of this Court in Daya Bhatnagar and Others Vs. State : 109 (2004) DLT 915 wherein it was held that the presence of one or more neutral or impartial witness would constitute the definition of "public view" as required to attract the offence under section 3(1)(x) of the Act.