STATE OF GOA Vs. MARIA ALIAS MARY MASCARENHAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Ms. Coutinho, learned Public Prosecutor for the appellant and Mr. D' Souza, learned Counsel for the respondent.

(2.) BY this appeal, the appellant " State of Goa, takes exception to the judgment and order dated 31. 08. 2006 passed by the Special Judge, South Goa, Margao acquitting the respondent for the offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (X) of the Schedule Caste and The Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short ).

(3.) BRIEFLY, the facts leading to the filing of the present appeal, are as follows : the Village Panchayat of Chicalim, Dabolim, had fixed a site inspection on 03/09/2005 at about 11. 30 a. m. in respect of proposed extension of Shipyard at Tambsodo. All the panchayat members including the respondent, were present for the site inspection. Sebastiao Menino da Gama P. W. 1, Antonnetta Barreto Figueiredio Fernandes P. W. 2, Manuel Francisco Colaco P. W. 3 and Piedade Gama P. W. 5,were also present for the said site inspection. All the four persons are the members of Scheduled Tribe Community i. e. 'gauda' Community. The accused does not belong to Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused abused the informants Sebastiao Gama and other members of the 'gauda' community by using offensive and humiliating language on the basis of the caste in public view by uttering the words such as "gauddeank kitem somzota, gauddeank hanga konnem apoileat, gauddeank koslo right asa hea dokant bitor sorunk" (what 'gaude' know, who called 'gaude' here, what right 'gaude' have to enter this dock ). The report was lodged by Sebastiao Gama, Antoneata Fernandes and Manuel Colaco with Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vasco Police Station, Vasco da Gama on 19. 11. 2005. The investigation was taken up and after completion of the investigation, the chargesheet was filed against the accused respondent. The respondent was charged for having committed the offences under Section 3 (1) (X) of the Act. The accused pleaded not guilty. In the course of the trial of Special Case No. 1/2006, the prosecution examined seven witnesses namely, Sebastiao Menino da Gama P. W. 1, Antonetta Bbarreto F. Fernandes P. W. 2, Manuel Francisco Colaco P. W. 3, Fanscisco Jose Nunes P. W. 4, Piedade Gama P. W. 5, Nilu Raut Dessai P. W. 6 and Dinraj Govekar P. W. 7. The accused did not lead evidence in defence.