PARSAD AHRIRWAR Vs. CHINTA KUSHWAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed by the appellant/victim under proviso of section 372 of the Cr.P.C against acquittal of the respondents No.1 to 3 from the charge of section 3(1)(x) of the Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 (in short 'the Act') vide judgment dated 29.3.2011 passed by the Special Judge, Chhatarpur (constituted under the Act in Special case No.153/08.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal in short are that one Parsad Ahirwar the appellant/victim lodged the FIR on dated 31.8.08 at P.S Kotwali, Chhatarpur contending that on dated 30.8.08 at about 6 O' Clock in the evening, he was looking after his crops in his field where accused/respondents No.1 to 3 lashed with sticks met him and respondent No.1 by abusing with filthy languages asked him why he has come to the field. He told them that it is his field. In response of it, respondents No.1 to 3, by abusing caught him, on which, in order to save himself, he ran away towards his residence. On the way, he (2) fell down. THEreafter, respondents No.1 to 3 also came there and started his beating by means of sticks. On his shouting, his brother Dhunni (PW 5) came there and rescued him. THEreafter, respondents No.1 to 3 after giving the criminal intimidation to kill him and taking the name of his caste covered under the Act, fled away from the place of incidence. THEreafter, he went to the police station and lodged the aforesaid report (Ex.P/1), on which, the offence of section 323,294,341,506-B and section 34 of the IPC so also the offence of section 3(1)(x) of the Act was registered. After holding the investigation, respondents No.1 to 3 were charge sheeted for the aforesaid offences.

(3.) THE appellant's counsel after taking me through the evidence led by the prosecution specially the deposition of Parsad Ahirwar (PW 2) argued that there was sufficient evidence in his deposition to convict respondents No.1 to 3 under the aforesaid offence of the Act but by ignoring the same, the trial court has extended the acquittal to respondents No.1 to 3 in such offence. In continuation, she said that in para-2 of the deposition said witness has categorically stated that initially the appellant was abused by the respondent No.1 to 3 with filthy languages and during such course the name of his caste "chamra" was also said. With these submissions, she said that respondents No.1 to 3 deserve for conviction under the aforesaid provision of the Act and prayed to convict them under such section by admitting and allowing this appeal.