PRATAP AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellants have preferred the present appeal being aggrieved with the judgment dated 28.9.2002 passed by the Special Judge under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Tikamgarh in Special Case No. 75/01, whereby the appellant no.2 has been convicted of the offences under Sections 323/34 of IPC and sentenced to three months S.I. with fine of Rs.250/ -, whereas the appellant no.1 has been convicted of offence under Sections 323/34, 294 of the IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Act (hereinafter it would be referred as the 'Special Act') and sentenced to three months' S.I. with fine of Rs.250/ -, fine of Rs.500/ - and six months R.I. with fine of Rs.1,000/ - respectively.

(2.) FACTS of the case in short are that the complainant Dayaram (PW -1) had lodged a typed FIR Ex.P/1 at Police Station, Prathvipur that on 16.12.2000 at about 3:00 p.m. in the noon, he was going to his house from the bus stand at village Madiya (Police Station Prathvipur, District Tikamgarh). On the way, the appellant Pratap dashed his bicycle intentionally to the bicycle of the complainant and thereafter, he abused him with the words relating to his caste and also abused him with obscene words. Thereafter, Pratap went inside the house and brought a stick. The appellant Chandan held the victim and Pratap assaulted him by that stick causing injuries on his head, fingers and abdomen. SHO, Prathvipur has registered the case with the document Ex.P/2. The victim Dayaram was sent for his medico legal examination to the Community Health Centre, Prathvipur where Dr. M.K. Jain (PW -3) had examined him and gave his report Ex.P/3. He found three injuries caused by hard and blunt object especially, at left index finger, left elbow and back. He was complaining of chest pain but no injury was found on the chest. After due investigation, the charge sheet was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, who committed the case to the Special Judge.

(3.) THE Special Judge after considering the evidence adduced by the parties, convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned above.