MOGILI SESHI REDDY Vs. STATION HOUSE OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A-1 to A-3 who are father and sons are the appellants herein. They were convicted by the lower Court under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and were sentenced to Simple Imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs.1,000/- each. A-2 and A-3 were also convicted under Section 323 I.P.C and were sentenced to pay fine of Rs.1,000/- each. Questioning the same, A-1 to A-3 filed this appeal.

(2.) P.W-1/victim belongs to Mala community which is a scheduled case, where as A-1 to A-3 belong to Reddy community. There is no dispute about the castes of the parties. Ex.P-7 is caste certificate relating to P.W-1. It is alleged that on 08.12.2003 at about 5.00 P.M when P.W-1 and his sister P.W-2 were talking to each other near drinking well in Jonnagiri village, A-1 who is having agricultural land near the well went to P.W-1 and abused him touching his Mala caste and questioned him as to whether it was the way for him to move, and that when P.W-1 questioned A-1 about the manner in which he spoke, A-2 and A-3 interfered and they also abused P.W-1 touching his Mala caste and pounced upon him and caused injuries to him. Plea of A-1 to A-3 is one of total denial and one of not guilty.

(3.) IT is contended by the appellants? counsel that when the offence took place at a public place on road near drinking water well, there is possibility of persons moving around the scene at the time of offence and that failure of the prosecution to examine independent witnesses is fatal to the prosecution. Except details of the scene of offence, there is nothing on record to show that there were any other persons than P.Ws 1 to 4 and A-1 to A-3 at the scene at the time of offence. Even though P.Ws 1 and 2 are closely related as brother and sister and P.W-3 is related as cousin, there is an independent witness P.W-4 in this case. The said independent witness who belongs to Madiga caste did not support the prosecution case. Independence of the witnesses cannot be determined on the basis of their castes. Even from among the same community people, there may be independent witnesses. IT gives wrong signals if it is observed that witnesses cannot be said to be independent simply because all of them belong to one and the same caste.