ARCHUNAN Vs. STATE AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant was convicted for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 and Section 506(i) of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and three months simple imprisonment respectively and also levied with fine, vide judgment dated 27.02.2013 in S.C.No.273 of 2010, on the file of the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Dindigul.

(2.) The prosecution case is that the appellant belongs to Hindu Gavara Naidu community, which is a notified backward class while the defacto complainant/second respondent herein belongs to Hindu Pallan Community, which is a notified scheduled caste. The appellant is said to have borrowed a sum of Rs.65,000/- from the defacto complainant in the year 2007. He did not repay the said amount. On 03.05.2009 at about 06.00 p.m., in Palani Bus stand near A.N.Bakery, when the defacto complainant demanded that the appellant should return the money, the appellant is said to have abused him by referring his community. In this regard, P.W.1/defacto complainant lodged Ex.P.1/complaint before Town Police Station, Palani, leading to registration of Ex.P.8/FIR in Crime No.1244 of 2009, for the offences under Sections 499 and 506(i) of I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989. Since the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 was disclosed, investigation was taken up by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Palani. After conducting the investigation and recording the statements of the witnesses and after completing all the usual formalities, final report was laid before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Palani. Cognizance of the offences was taken and the case was committed to the Sessions Court vide P.R.C.No.31 0f 2010. The case was taken up for trial in S.C.No.273 of 2010, on the file of the leaned Principal District and Sessions Judge, Dindigul District. Charges were framed against the appellant for the offences under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 and Section 506(i) of I.P.C. The appellant denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

(3.) The prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses and marked Exs.P.1 to P.10. On the side of the accused, one Selvaraj was examined as D.W.1 and Ex.D.1 was also marked.