STATE OF H.P. Vs. KAMAL SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State has filed this appeal against the judgement of acquittal, dated 10.11.1999, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Chamba Division, in Sessions Trial No. 31 of 1997.

(2.) THE prosecution case in brief is that respondent was tried for committing offence, under Section 3 (x) (xi) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The allegations against the respondent were that Joginder Singh husband of Smt. Kanta Devi filed a case, under Sections 325, 323, 506 IPC against the respondent, which was subsequently compromised on Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? 25.5.1994 and in consideration of the compromise, the respondent had paid a sum of Rs. 1000/- to the husband of Kanta Devi. On 11.6.1996, at about 6 p.m. at village Tipri, respondent intercepted Kanta Devi near the shop of one Karnail Singh and then uttered words "Oye Sippni Tune Mera Ek Hazar Rupaya Dena Hai Ya Nahin." Smt. Kanta Devi belongs to Scheduled Caste, that is "Sippni". The respondent also told that he would recover Rs.1000/- from her husband, otherwise he would kill him. Thereafter respondent caught hold Kanta Devi from her hair and threw her on the ground and also gave kick and fist blows. She was saved by Smt. Onkar Bala, Karnail Singh, who were present on the spot. The matter was reported to the police at Police Post, Sihunta. Smt. Kanta Devi was got medically examined. After completion of the investigation, the respondent was challaned. He was charged, under Section 3(x) (xi) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses. In his statement, under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the respondent has stated that because of enmity, a false case has been planted against him. In defence, he has examined DW 1 Karnail Singh, in front of whose shop, the respondent is alleged to have given beatings to Smt. Kanta Devi. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted the respondent, as noticed above.

(3.) SMT . Kanta Devi has appeared as PW 1 and deposed that she belongs to "Sippni" caste and respondent belongs to "Rajput" community. On 11.6.1996, at about 6 p.m., she was going to the shop of one Karnail Singh at village Baloo for purchasing some grocery items. The respondent was already there. He asked her that her husband used to abuse him. On this, she stated that the case had already been compromised and there was no occasion for him to abuse the respondent. Thereafter, respondent had uttered the words "Oye Sippni Tune Mera Ek Hazar Rupaya Dena Hai Ya Nahin" and also said that he would recover the money from them, otherwise he would kill them. The respondent thereafter pulled her from her hair and had thrown her down on the road and gave her beatings with kick and fist blows. She was saved by Smt. Onkar Bala, Karnail Singh shopkeeper, and Jaisi Ram elder brother of her husband also came there and witnessed the incident. Smt. Kanta Devi was got medically examined. The respondent met her again after three days of the incident at village Khola and asked her to return rupees one thousand to him. On 15.6.1996, the respondent threatened her husband and used filthy language against him in presence of Surinder. In cross ­ examination, she has admitted that they are not having good relations with the respondent for the last four years. She has further admitted that there is a dispute between the respondent and the husband of Smt. Onkar Bala.