GURMAIL SINGH Vs. KRISHAN KUMAR AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The contour of the facts and material, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and emanating from the record is that, initially petitioner-complainant Gurmail Singh son of Jangir Singh(for brevity "the complainant") has filed the complaint against Krishan Kumar alias Neelu son of Chaman Lal and his old mother Savitari Devi, accusedrespondents under Sections 420, 406, 323, 500 and 506 IPC read with Section 3 & 4 of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989(hereinafter to be referred as "the Act"), inter alia, pleading that he had worked as a labourer in the commission agent shop of the accused, styled as M/s Prem Chand & Company during the crop season of Rabi 2007. They have only paid him Rs.800/- instead of Rs.3,000/- as his wages.

(2.) Sequelly, it was claimed that on 17.07.2007, when he (complainant) had gone to Bhawanigarh to purchase some domestic articles, then all of a sudden, the accused met him and he requested them to pay the unpaid wages. They started uttering derogatory remarks to him. Thereafter, accused No.1 caught hold of the complainant from his beard and slapped him 2-3 times, whereas accused No.2 kicked him while lying on the ground. Both the accused were stated to have uttered derogatory remarks against the caste of the complainant. In the background of these allegations, the complainant has filed the present complaint against the respondents-accused, in the manner depicted hereinabove.

(3.) The Judge, Special Court, dismissed the complaint and acquitted the respondents-accused, by means of impugned judgment of acquittal dated 11.08.2011.