AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the appellant, which is the State. There is a delay of 44 days in filing the appeal. However, the appeal is considered on merits. It was the case of the prosecution that one Narasamma who was the President of the Village Panchayath, namely, Gangonahalli village and that on 28.05.2012 at about 2.30 p.m. she had gone to a public tap to collect water and at that point of time with the knowledge that Narasamma belong to a scheduled caste the accused is said to have abused her referring to her as "Madiga Munde" and that she has defiled the water tap by using the same and it is also stated that the husband of accused No.1 also came there and repeated the same foul words and even threatened her saying that merely because she was the President of the Village Panchayath or that her son was in the police force she could not imagine that she could dominate everyone and that they would teach her a lesson and even kill her. It is in this background that the complainant had approached the police and the case was registered against the accused for offence punishable under Section 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and under Section 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. After further proceedings the accused has stood trial and plead not guilty. On charges being framed the prosecution has tendered evidence through PWs.1 to 7 and had got marked several exhibits and documents, on the basis of which the court below had framed the following points for consideration and held the same in the negative and acquitted the accused.
"1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused persons before the court in furtherance of their common intention, knowing fully well that CW.1 belongs to SC/ST Community and they belong to Gowda Community abused her by pointing towards the caste on 28.05.2012 at 2.30 p.m. in respect of collecting water from the public tap and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 3(1)(10) of SC/ST Act, 1989 r/w 34 of IPC.
Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused persons on the above said date, time and place, in furtherance of their common intention, gave criminal intimidation to take out their life and caused alarm and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 506 read with Sec.34 of IPC?
It is this which is under challenge.
The court below while discussing the testimony of the several witnesses has found that the alleged incident had taken place in the afternoon in the village where there were several houses around the spot and it was inexplicable that only supporters of the complainant were present and none else though there were several families living around the place and on further statements of the very witnesses where they had admitted that they were all political supporters of the complainant, the court has concluded that they were biased and were intent on framing the accused and therefore had tendered evidence in support of the case of the prosecution. It is on this reasoning that the accused has been acquitted and the incident is also noticed as being a minor incident which has been blown out of the proportion. In that, it transpires that accused No.1 was filling water in her pot when the complainant had appeared there and had tried to take precedence in filling her pot. It is this which had lead to the argument and the alleged abuse. It is in this background that the court below had negated the seriousness of the offence alleged and has trivialized the entire incident. There is no fault to be found with the reasoning of the court below. There is no merit in this appeal. Hence the same is rejected. The application for condonation of delay is therefore redundant.