AMIR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Being dissatisfied with the judgment dated 14-2-2003 rendered in Special Sessions Trial No. 29/2002 by the learned Special Sessions Judge, Ratlam, whereby he convicted appellants for the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter called as "the Act") and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5.000/- each, in default whereof to undergo R.I. for 5 years. Learned Judge has also convicted appellant No. 1 Amir for the offence punishable under Section 307, IPC and appellant No. 2 Anis for the offence punishable under tion 307/34, IPC and sentenced them to suffer rigourous imprisonment for life with fine of Rs. 5.000/- each, in default whereof to undergo RI for 5 years respectively. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

(2.) In brief the prosecution case before the trial Court was that in the night of 7-7- 2002 at 10.30 pm. complainant Raju Lashkari was purchasing ground-nut in the market. He was accompanied by his friends Rajesh, Vikki Pahadiya and Bharat Rathore. At that very moment from the hotel of one Devchand, appellants Anis, Amir and their friend Azam Musalman came out and com- plainant Raju asked whereabouts of Azam from Anis. Anis annoyed on the way of ask- ing of complainant Raju about Azam and told that he was talking in indignified manner. He also delivered threat to kill him. There- after complainant was caught hold by ap- pellant No. 2 Anis and appellant No. 1 Amir took out knife and also dealt 5 to 6 blows causing injury at left rib, scapula region, left parietal part of the skull, right jaw etc. His shirt and Baniyan were also cut. Blood was oozing from the wounds. The incident was witnessed by witnesses Rajesh, Vikki and Bharat in electric light. They also tried to save the injured Raju. It was also the pros- ecution case that prior to this before one day the accused persons demanded money from the complainant and picked up quar- rel. When the incident was intervened by witnesses, appellants while delivering threat abused him in the name of his caste and went away. The complainant was taken to the hospital in auto-rickshaw by his friends. In the hospital Dehat Nalish (Ex. P/3) was lodged. Thereafter on that basis First Infor- mation Report was registered vide Ex. P/2 in Police Station, Industrial Area. After nec- essary investigation charge sheet was filed against the appellants for the above men- tioned offences. Appellants have pleaded innocence. Therefore, they put on trial. The prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses in its support; whereas appellants have not examined any witness in their de- fence. The learned trial Court convicted the appellants, as mentioned above. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) We have heard Shri Jaisingh, learned Senior Advocate instructed by Shri Vivek Singh.for appellant No. 1 Amir; Shri Sanjay SecSharma, learned counsel for appellant No. 2 Anis; and Shri Glrish Desai, learned Deputy Advocate General for Respondent/ State and also perused the entire record carefully.