UTTAMLAL DULICHAND YERNE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being aggrieved by the Judgment and order of conviction passed by the Special Court on 28th July, 1997 in Special Criminal Case No. 14 of 1995 the appellant has preferred this appeal on the grounds mentioned in the appeal and verbally canvassed before me.

(2.) With the assistance of learned Government Prosecutor and Advocate for the appellant, I have scrutinised the record and re-appreciated the evidence on record. The prosecution story stated in brief is that the complainant had contracted with the accused for construction of a well in her field. This work was going on when the accused allegedly complained that he is short of hands and, therefore, the victim also should work with his labourers for digging the well. Accordingly, they started working. In the evening of 15th April, 1995 around 6 p.m. when all others left the field the victim continued to be there as the field belonged to her. Seeing that she is alone, the accused came near her, held her and outraged here modesty. She called her husband who arrived at the scene of the offence and saved her. Though the incident occurred on 15th April, 1995 the first information report regarding the occurrence was filed only on 8th May, 1995. The reason given for the delay in filing the F.I.R. was apprehension of the complainant that accused had contracted to construct the well and he may not complete the well and that will hamper over the agricultural operation. On the face of it the delay is not at all explained. The reasons given is very flimsy. The prosecutions has examined 4 witnesses to prove its case.

(3.) However, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the entire investigation is vitiated and, therefore, the order of conviction is liable to be struck down. Because, according to him Rule 7 of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1995 provides that investigation of crimes under the Act has to be done by the person not below the rank of a Deputy Superintendent of Police. A persual of Rule 7 will show that elaborate procedure for investigation is thus provided by the rules. The reason is not far off to see.