MAHESH AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 21.9.2011, passed by the Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act in Special Case No.7 of 2009 whereby the appellants were convicted for offence punishable under Sections 294, 323 read with Section 34 of I.P.C and sentenced with fine of Rs.500/- and six months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine each of them has to undergo for one month and one month's rigorous imprisonment respectively.

(2.) The prosecution's story in short is that the complainant Sunil (P.W.1) was a mason. On 26.11.2008, he went to do his work in Gujar Samaj Dharamshala, Bhoganwa, Police Station Mandhata, District Khandwa. At about 8.00 a.m in the morning the appellants met him in front of that Dharamshala and abused him on the basis of caste as well as by obscene words. Thereafter, they assaulted the victim. The appellant no.1, Mahesh gave a kick on the scrotum of the victim. On his shouting the witnesses Jitendra @ Gudiya (P.W.3) and Rajesh (P.W.9) came to the spot who, saved the victim. The appellants went from the spot by giving threatening to the complainant. The complainant lodged an FIR Ex.P/1 at Police Station Mandhata at about 9.10 a.m in the morning. He was sent for his statement and medico legal examination. Dr. Rohit Hirwe (P.W.6) examined the victim Sunil and gave his report Ex.P/6-A. He found that there was bleeding from the urethra of the victim and therefore, victim was referred to the District Hospital, Khandwa. After due investigation a charge sheet was filed before the JMFC, Khandwa who, committed the case to the Special Court Khandwa under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).

(3.) The appellants abjured their guilt. They took the defence that the complainant had misbehaved with the sister of the the appellant no.2 Ramu @ RamKrishna and therefore, the villagers assaulted the complainant and thereafter, the complainant lodged a false FIR against the appellants. However, no defence evidence was adduced.