GAJANAN BALIRAM MEHETRE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the order passed by Special Judge, Buldhana in Special (Atrocities) Case No. 33/1994, convicting the Appellant/accused for the offence punishable under Section 3 (i) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 sentencing the appellant/accused to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- the appellant has approached this Court by way of the present appeal.

(2.) With the able assistance of Shri. K. P. Sadawarte, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant/accused and Shri. Jichkar, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, appearing for the respondent-State, I have gone through the evidence and the impugned judgment.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the appellant, invited my attention to the Section 3 of the Act, which reads thus : " 3 (i) (xi) - Whoever, not being a member of the Scheduled Castes or a Scheduled Tribes with intent to dishonour or outrage her modesty shall be punished, as provided there. " THE contentions raised on behalf of the appellant, is that, this being the requirement of the Section , the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the same beyond doubt, and that there was assault or use of force to a woman belonging to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. What has been proved by the prosecution is that the prosecutrix/complainant a woman was belonging to the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe, was requested to allow sexual intercourse/illicit relationship, and on her declining, she was allowed to go home. However, there is no evidence on record to show that there was any assault or use of force to the prosecutrix (P. W.1 ).