Penal Code, 1860 – ss.147, 148, 149, 307, 323, 504 – Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – s.3(2)(v) – Appellants, at the outset, conceded that so far as the offences punishable under IPC are concerned, the prayer for discharge would require extensive evaluation of evidence and hence, challenge to the order framing charges was given up – However, the ingredients of s.3(2)
(v) of the SC/ST Act are not prima facie made out against the accused appellants from the admitted allegations of the prosecution. Held: As per the highest case of prosecution, the accused ‘VU’ fired a gun shot at ‘R’ which hit him in the left thigh – The only projection made in the prosecution case regarding the offence under SC/ST Act was that the witness ‘VK’ being a member of SC community was subjected to casteist abuses by the accused appellants after the gunshot was fired at ‘R’ – However, the medicolegal report opined that a boil/abscess was noticed on R’s thigh and no evidence of gun shot was found – From a bare perusal of the s.3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, it is crystal clear that for the offence to be constituted, there must be an allegation that the accused not being a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe committed an offence under the IPC punishable for a term of 10 years or more against a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe knowing that such person belongs to such ‘community’ – Going by the material collected during investigation, it is manifest that the incident had the undertones of a political rivalry – Be that as it may, as per the highest case of prosecution, the only offence under IPC punishable with imprisonment of 10 years or more being the offence u/s. 307 IPC has been applied on the basis of the gun shot allegedly fired by the accused ‘VU’ upon ‘R’, which admittedly did not result into any corresponding injury – After perusal of the entire material on record, there is no hesitation in concluding that from the admitted case set up by the prosecution, there is no such allegation that the offence under IPC punishable with imprisonment of 10 years or more was committed by an accused of upper caste upon a person belonging to the Scheduled Caste community with the knowledge that such person belonged to the said community. [Paras 14, 15, 16, 17] LIST OF CITATIONS AND OTHER REFERENCES
Suresh @ Pappu Bhudharmal Kalani v. State of Maharashtra, AIR (2001) SC 1375 – referred to.
OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.