LAWS(TLNG)-2020-2-54

CHETKURI SHIVARAJU Vs. STATE OF AP

Decided On February 12, 2020
Chetkuri Shivaraju Appellant
V/S
State Of Ap Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Special Judge for trial of Cases under S.Cs & S.Ts. (POA) Act-cum- VIII Additional District Judge, Nizamabad, in Sessions Case No.31 of 2009 dated 06.05.2011, whereby the appellant-A-1 was convicted of the offences punishable under Sections 3 (1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 and 323 of I.P.C . and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence under Section 3 (1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 and he was also sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months for the offence under Section 323 of I.P.C. However, A-2 to A-5 were found not guilty of the offences punishable under Sections 3 (1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act , 1989 and 323 of I.P.C . and were acquitted of the said offences.

(2.) The gravamen of the charge against the accused, in brief, is that on 10.05.2009 at 11.00 P.M. while P.W.1-Mala Jangam Suguna, wife of Mallesham, was scolding her younger sister Jangam Kalyani (P.W.3) as she was not doing any household work, A-1 to A-5 by thinking that P.W.1 is scolding them, came to her house and attacked them and caught hold the saree of P.W.1 and dragged her and then A-1 caught hold the hand of P.W.1, beat her and threatened her with dire consequences and also kicked P.W.3 on her stomach. P.W.1 also stated in the complaint that when her father tried to intervene to rescue them, the accused thrashed him and abused him by his caste name "as nee mala kollena dengutha mala lanjakoduka".

(3.) The plea of the appellant-A1 is one of total denial. The prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined P.Ws.1 to 9 and got marked Exs.P1 to P9. On behalf of the accused, Ex.D1 was marked.