SUBRAMANI Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants herein, who are accused 1 to 7, stand convicted and sentenced by the Special Judge/Principal Sessions Judge, Villupuram Sessions Division, Villupuram in S.C.No.330 of 2000, which reads as follows:-

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in brief, is as follows: P.W.1 to P.W.9 , all belong to Adi Dravida Community and the accused belong to Vanniyar Community. P.W.1 Elumalai and P.W.2 Ravi and their colleagues used to play cricket in Athanur Tank and in the said place, Prabhu and other boys belonging to Padayatchi Community were in the habit of attending call of nature. On 10.7.199 at about 5.00p.m., while the said Prabhu was attending the call of nature in the said place, the colony boys found it and P.W.1 and others came and informed to the colony people. When P.W.1 along with other witnesses went and questioned, Subramani, who is the Junior Paternal uncle of the said Prabhu along with other accused appeared with deadly weapons and that the first accused abused by saying" gugr'fSfF guXffhs XHpfSfF ,'F vddlh ntiy c'f jFjpfF fphpfbfl xU nflh . THE 3rd accused cut on the head of P.W.1 with Koduval 5th accused cut on his right hand and stabbed on his back4th accused beat him on his left shoulder 7th accused beat him on his head2nd and 6th accused also beat him on his back with stick. THE other witnesses viz., P.W.2 to P.W.9 were also attacked by the accused. P.W.1 went to the police station and lodged a complaint with Ulundurpet Police and P.W.12 Sub Inspector of Police registered a case in Cr.No.527 of 1999 under Sections 147,148,324,323 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) S.C/S.T Act and prepared First Information Report Ex P13 and sent the injured to the hospital for taking treatment. P.W11, the Civil Surgeon attached to the Government Hospital, Ulundurpet examined the injured and treated the injured witnesses and issued Accident Registers Ex P3 to Ex P12. He found the following injuries on the person of P.W.1

(3.) THE learned counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that though all the accused have been convicted under Section 3(1)(x) of S.C/S.T Act, according to the prosecution case, it was only the first accused who is said to have used the community name. THE learned counsel further submitted that though the complaint given by the 6th accused was registered, the police has not yet investigated the case and thereby caused prejudice to the accused. No material was placed before the trial Court, though the 6th accused and other accused sustained injuries and the prosecution has not explained the injuries sustained by the accused and no action has been taken. Even according to the prosecution case, it was only the prosecution party, which came to the place of the accused and therefore they are only the aggressors. THE learned counsel would further submit that the prosecution has not produced any relevant material in this case and the trial Court has failed to appreciate the fact that the accused were also injured.