- (1.)CHALLENGE is made in this appeal to the order of conviction and sentence dated 16.02.2006 and made in S.C.No.73 of 2005 on the file of the Learned Principal District and Sessions Judge (Special Court under Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act) 1989, Namakkal.
(2.)THAT on 07.12.2004, PW 8 the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Namakkal had laid a charge sheet against the appellants 1 and 2 under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (PA) Act and under Sections 506(1) and 509 of IPC before the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Namakkal, alleging that on 16.11.2004 at about 05.00pm., near the road leads to Pudhuchatram from Lakapuram, the appellants 1 and 2 had abused PW 1 and PW 2 viz., Tamarai and Sarasu in the name of their caste as they being the members of Scheduled Caste, with an intention to insult or intimidate or humiliate them within the public view and with an intention to insult their modesty and intrude upon their privacy.
The Learned Judicial Magistrate No.2, Namakkal had taken cognizance of the offences and committed the case to the Court of Sessions after completion of preliminary enquiry. On receipt of the case, the Learned Principal Sessions Judge, Namakkal Sessions Division, after hearing both sides had framed the following three charges; Charge NO.1 " Under Section 3(1)(x) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (PA) Act 1989. Charge No.2 - Under Section 506(1) of IPC. Charge NO.3 " Under Section 509 of IPC.

When the ingredients of the charges were explained and questioned, the appellants 1 and 2 had pleaded their innocence and claimed to be tried. Hence, they were put on trial. The prosecution in order to bring home the guilt of the appellants had totally examined 9 witnesses and during the course of their examination Exs.P1 to P13 were marked.

(3.)THE facts in brief which giving rise to the appeal as under; 5.1. PW 1 Tamarai and PW 2 Sarasu are the residents of Navani Idayapatti Village. THEy are belonged to Arundhathiyar community. THE appellants 1 and 2 are also the residents of the same village and belonged to Gounder community. A graveyard is located on the western side of the village. Since, the residents of the village of PW 1 and PW 2 are not having lavatory facility they have been using the said graveyard to answer the call of nature. THE land of first appellant is located on the northern side of the said graveyard. THE second appellant is also having his land on the northern side of the first appellant's land. That on 16.11.2004 at about 04.00pm., both PW 1 and PW 2 had been to the said graveyard for answering the call of nature. 5.2. While so, the appellants 1 and 2 who were present there had abused them in the name of their caste and threatened them that they would break their hands and legs if they happened to come again that side. This was witnessed by PW 3 and PW 4. Fearing danger PW 1 and PW 2 started running and climbed on the road leading to Natamangalam from Pudhuchatram. Since, the appellants had abused them in the name of their caste in the presence of PW 3 and PW 4 they got annoyed and humiliated. At about 06.00pm., PW 1 had informed this incident to her husband Sengotayan and thereafter she long with her husband had been to Namakkal and lodged a complaint under Ex.P1 before the District Superintendent of Police. 5.3. That on 17.11.2004, PW 8 Deputy Superintendent of Police, Namakkal Sub-Division had received the complaint under Ex.P1 from the office of the Superintendent of Police with an endorsement under Ex.P8 to register a case. Accordingly PW 8 had forwarded the said complaint to the Inspector of Police attached to Pudhuchatram Police Station to register the case. THE endorsement made by PW 8 on the complaint was marked as Ex.P9. 5.4. In pursuant to Ex.P9, PW 7, Sub-Inspector of Police attached to Pudhuchatram Police Station had registered a case on 17.11.2004 in Crime No.307 of 2004, under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (PA) Act 1989 and thereafter he had forwarded the first information report, Ex.P7 along with the complaint Ex.P1 to the Learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Namakkal. He had also submitted a requisition to the Superintendent of Police, Namakkal to nominate an investigating officer. 5.5. In pursuant to the requisition made by PW 7, the District Superintendent of Police had nominated PW8 Deputy Superintendent of Police as the investigating officer vide in his order dated 17.11.2004 bearing No.CM98/TCR/Namakkal/2004. THE Order of the District Superintendent of Police was marked as Ex.P10. 5.6. On receipt of the case records, P.W.8 had been to the place of occurrence on 18.06.2004 at about 06.00 a.m., inspected the same and prepared an observation mahazar under Ex.P3 in the presence of the witnesses viz.P.W.5 Sunder Raj and one Sadashivam. He had also prepared a rough sketch in respect of the place of occurrence under Ex.P11. THEn he had examined the witnesses P.W.3 and P.W.4 and other witnesses and recorded their respective statements. At about 09.30 am., he had arrested the second appellant after explaining him the reason for his arrest under Ex.P12 and sent him to Court for being remanded to judicial custody. 5.7. That on 19.11.2004, he had given a request under Ex.P13 to P.W.6 Tahsildar requesting to issue community certificate in respect of P.W.1 and P.W.2 and the appellants 1 and 2 respectively. 5.8. In pursuant to Ex.P13, P.W.6 had issued Ex.P3 and Ex.P4 community certificates in respect of P.W.1 and P.W.2 saying that P.W.1 and P.W.2 are belonged to Hindu Arundhathiyar community, which comes under the category of Scheduledd Caste as per the Government Order. Similarly, he had also issued Exs.P5 and P6 in respect of the appellant 1 and 2 saying that they are belonged to Hindu Vellalar community, which comes under the category of backward class. 5.9. THE first appellant had voluntarily surrendered before the Court. After the completion of his investigation, P.W.8 had laid a final report against the appellants 1 and 2 on 07.12.2004 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Namakkal. With the evidence of P.W.8, the prosecution has closed its side.
When the incriminating circumstances arising out of the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses ranging from PW 1 to PW 8 were read over and explained to the appellants 1 and 2 during the course of the proceedings under Section 313 Cr.P.C., while denying their testimonies they had jointly replied that there was previous enimity between them and PW 4 Ramasamy. DW 6 Mr.Swaminathan, Inspector of Police who was working in the District Police Office at Namakkal was also placed in additional charge of Puduchatram Police Station. In order to settle a civil dispute between the appellants and PW 4 Ramasamy, the appellants were asked to come to the office of the District Police Head Quarters at Namakkal. Besides this they were also compelled to settle the dispute with PW 4. Hence, the first appellant had approached his lawyer and caused a notice to be served on the Inspector of Police, DW 6 Mr.Swaminathan as well as on the District Superintendent of Police.