LAWS(BOM)-2007-3-179

STATE OF GOA Vs. SHRIKANT PARSHURAM AUDI

Decided On March 22, 2007
STATE OF GOA Appellant
V/S
SHRIKANT PARSHURAM AUDI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a State's appeal against the acquittal of the accused under Sections 3(1)(x) of the Schedule Castes and the Schedule Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act, 1989 and Sections 504, 323 r/w 34 I.P.C.

(2.) THE case against the accused was investigated by Dy.S.P. Gaonkar/PW9 after a complaint was filed by Suchitra Mazgaonkar/PW2 . It appears that the family of Suchitra/PW2 and the accused are neighbours and if Suchitra/PW2 and her family have been residing at Aquem Baixo for about 29 years, the accused came to reside in their neighbourhood, about 6 years prior to the incident. The family of Suchitra/PW2 belongs to Chambar caste which is a Schedule caste while the accused are Brahmins. The houses in which the family of Suchitra/PW2 and the accused reside are separated by a road of about 8 meters width. The incident took place on 13-4-2003 at about 7.30 a.m. when Mahadev Mazgaonkar/PW1 was on the first floor of his house while Shrikant Audi/A-1 was outside his house in their compound while Suchitra/PW2 was in their own compound plucking flowers. As per the complaint filed by Suchitra/PW2, Shrikant Audi/A-1 was jealous as her family were well employed and therefore was abusing them calling Chamarin cheddi over a year but they did not file a complaint. According to her, when she was plucking flowers within her compound wall Shrikant Audi/A-1 as usual started calling Chamarin cheddi fullam kadta, dev korta and started singing Vitola tum ghora kumbar amchea mukar ravta Mazgaonkar chambar Jana Gana Mana Adi Nayaka Jaye he Chambarin muntta etc. and started abusing her with filthy language in public view in presence of Shiuram K. Dessai/PW5, one Purohit and other neighbours, etc.

(3.) THE learned Special Judge appointed under the provisions of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes Act, 1989 after assessing the evidence produced on behalf of the prosecution has chosen to give benefit of doubt to both the accused and acquit them for the offences mentioned herein above.