Criminal Appeal No. 472 of 2012. Case: Dnyaneshwar Maroti Bembde Vs State of Maharashtra. High Court of Bombay (India)
| Case Number | Criminal Appeal No. 472 of 2012 |
| Counsel | For Appellant: A. V. Patil-Indrale, Adv. and For Respondents: R. P. Phatke, APP, Adv. |
| Judges | T. V. Nalawade, J. |
| Issue | Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (33 of 1989) - Section 3(1)(x) |
| Citation | 2015 CriLJ 3106 |
| Judgement Date | March 17, 2015 |
| Court | High Court of Bombay (India) |
Judgment:
-
The appeal is filed against judgment and order of Special Case (Attro.) No. 11/2011(New) (Special Case (Attro.) No. 4/2010 (Old)) which was pending in Court of Special Judge, Ahmedpur, District Latur. The appellants are convicted and sentenced for offence punishable under section 3 (1) (x) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as 'Special Act' for short) and also for offence punishable under section 323 read with 34 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC' for short). The sentence of rigorous imprisonment of six months is given and fine is also imposed. Both the sides are heard.
-
The complainant was working as Circle Agricultural Officer at Kingaon, Tahsil Ahmedpur, District Latur at the relevant time. Accused Nos. 1 and 2 were working as Agricultural Assistants and accused No. 3 had retired from the same office. It is the cases of complainant accused Nos. 1 to 3/appellants were constantly harassing him with the intention that he should not ask them to do any work.
-
In the complaint, complainant had mentioned two instances in which he was harassed. According to him, the first incident took place on 21.12.1999 at about 4.30 p.m. when he was taking tea in a hotel of one Mahajan from Ahmedpur. According to him, accused Nos. 1 to 3 came there, picked up quarrel and asked him as to why he had given report against them to superior officer. According to him, they gave threats of life to him on that occasion and pushed him during quarrel.
-
It is the case of complainant that on 25.12.2009 at about 5.30 p.m. he was present near bridge constructed on Lendi river near Ahmedpur and he was having talk with farmers like Sanjay Kamble, Deepak Kamble and others. According to him, accused Nos. 1 to 3 came there from Ahmedpur side in a car and they picked up quarrel with him. According to him, all the accused gave abuses to him by taking the name of his caste which is a scheduled caste and uttered following words against him. (Vernacular matter omitted...Ed.) (Ma-hargya, Dhedgya you are Mahar of Barshi and you have become arrogant after coming to here). It is the case of complainant that in the incident in question he was manhandled by all the accused and threats of life were given to him. According to him, when this incident was taking place, other witnesses like Digamber Gaikwad, Ashok Lamture and Nabilal Shaikh also came there and they rescued him.
-
It is the case of complainant that due to the aforesaid incident, he was disturbed and he wanted to give report to superior officer first. According to him, he did not give report to police immediately. According to him, he waited also with the hope that accused may improve their conduct, but then he realized that they were passing threats to him and they were not improving their conduct. When the incident took place on 25.12.2009, the report to police came to be given on 1.1.2010.
-
The complainant belongs to Mahar caste. Accused No. 1 belongs to Yellam caste, acc-used No. 2 belongs to Lamani community and accused No. 3 belongs to Sonar caste. Accused are not from scheduled castes or scheduled tribes. Before police, complainant produced his caste certificate. One Sub Divisional Officer, the officer appointed for the Special Act, made investigation of the case and filed charge-sheet for the aforesaid offences and also for offences punishable under sections 504, 506 of I.P.C. The Trial Court has held the appellants guilty for aforesaid offences only.
-
Complainant Anil (PW 1) has given evidence on the first incident dated 21.12.2009. He has deposed that at the relevant time, he was present in the office with his colleagues like Kande, Gundwad and others. According to him, Kande, Assistant Agricultural Officer had made complaint against accused No. 1 and so, he called accused No. 1 on phone to his office. He has...
To continue reading
Request your trial