(1.) This is a revision application filed by the original complainant. In this complaint, the petitioner claimed to be a Mahar and as such a member of the Schedule Caste. According to him, he was passing by the road said of Maruti Temple. Accused called him and referred to him as Dhedgya and asked him whether he could be able to become Upa-Sarpancha of the Gram Panchayat. It is alleged that the accused further abused him and gave him kick and first blows and felled him down. The incident is claimed to have taken place at about 8.30 p.m. in village Shiral in Taluka Ashti and the complainant is alleged to have been lodged at the Police Station of Ashti at 11 p.m. The complainant also claimed that before he went to the Police Station, he had contacted the Police Patil of the village and informed him about the incident. The accused was, therefore, chargesheeted for offences under sections 323, 504 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code read with section 7(i)(d) of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955.
(2.) At the trial, the complainant examined himself and also examined three more witnesses. The accused examined the Police Patil of the village to destroy the complainants case that before lodging the complaint in the Police Station, he had contacted the Police Patil and informed him of the incident.
(3.) The learned Magistrate disbelieved the evidence of the complainant and his witnesses and acquitted the accused of the offences with which he was charged. He further though that the complaint was lodged due to the party spirit and it was lodged at the instigation of one Raosaheb, who was the leader of one faction in the village, while the other faction was being led by the accused. He, therefore, issued notice to the complainant under section 250 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, as to why he should not be required to pay compensation of Rs. 100/- to the accused. The complainant challenges this order of learned Magistrate dated 31-7-1980 in this revision application.