LAWS(MPH)-2012-9-64

HOLANBAI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

Decided On September 11, 2012
HOLANBAI Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal is preferred by the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment dated 14/8/1997 passed by the Special Judge under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Waraseoni District Balaghat in Special Case No.28/1995, whereby the appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for brevity "Special Act") and sentenced for six months' rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.50/-. In default of payment of fine, one month simple imprisonment was also directed.

(2.) THE prosecution's case, in short, is that on 15.4.1995 at about 4:00 PM in the evening Kaushalya Bai (PW-2) went to fetch some water from a hand pump situated in village Tengnikalan (Police Station Lalbarra District Balaghat). THE appellant Holanbai also went to take some water from that hand pump and she insulted Kaushalya Bai (PW-2) on the basis of the caste and thrown her water, because it was touched by Kaushalya Bai. Again on 17.4.1995 at about 6:00 AM in the morning the complainant Radheyshyam (PW-1), husband of Kaushalya Bai went to take water from the same hand pump, then Anandi Lohar prohibited him to take water from that hand pump. THE complainant Radheyshyam went to the Sarpanch and thereafter with the help of the Sarpanch he went to the Police Station Lalbarra. THE matter was transferred for investigation to the Police Station AJK. After due investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the Special Court, Waraseoni District Balaghat.

(3.) DURING the pendency of the appeal, the complainant Kaushalya Bai has submitted an application IA No.18288/12 seeking permission to compromise and IA No.18291/12 to accept the compromise with the help of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. It was directed that the said applications will be considered at the time of final argument, and therefore the complainant Kaushalya Bai was also present at the time of final argument. She has shown her willingness to do compromise. The applications are to be decided in the judgment.