SANTOSH LODHA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under Section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, preferred by the petitioner/accused is directed against an order dated 14th March, 2011 in Special Case No. 20/2011 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Guna, framing thereby the charge against the petitioner for commission of offence punishable under Section 325 of IPC read with Section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, for short the Act.

(2.) The facts, in brief, are that on 14th January, 2011 at about 4.30 p.m. in Village Moria near Khedi reservoir (under construction), when the complainant Badrilal was busy in performing his labour work, the accused-petitioner, who happened to be Supervisor of that construction work, came to him and told to do work as per his accord and when the complainant refused, the accused abused him and caused injuries with a Spade. Accordingly, an FIR was lodged. During investigation, the statement of complainant and other eye-witnesses were recorded. The witnesses in case-diary statements, stated that the accused, who was in-charge or the work and belonging to a general category, with an intention to insult the complainant belonging to Scheduled Caste, hurdled him abuses denoting to his caste. Consequently, the offence under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Act was added. After investigation, the charge-sheet was filed before the Criminal Court. On committal, the trial is under progress. The Trial Judge framed the charge under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Act alongwith other offences under the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner/accused is that the impugned order of charge is against the settled principles of law and without jurisdiction, hence, same is liable to be set aside. It is submitted that on perusal of the FIR and the statements recorded during investigation, prima facie it clearly appears that the words uttered by the accused were under provocation without any intention to insult or humiliate the complainant by his caste. It is well settled law that mere utterance of words denoting caste of the complainant in a sudden provocation without intention to insult or humiliate does not give rise to constitute the offence under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Act. It is, therefore, prayed that by allowing the revision, the order of charge for commission of offence under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Act be set aside. In support of his submissions, learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in the cases of Surendra Kaurav and others Vs. State of M.P., 2008 1 MPHT 317, Ram Chandra and others Vs. State of M.P., 2009 1 MPWN 77 and Shankar Singh Vs. Stale of M.P., 2005 2 MPWN 21.