The accused appellant has assailed the order dated 21 March, 2023 passed by the High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal No 1088 of 2002 whereby the joint application filed by the appellant and the complainant of the case under Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(hereinafter being referred to as ‘CrPC’) was disallowed to the extent of offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/criminal/analysis-of-circumstantial-evidence-conviction-reversed/
During the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, the accused appellant and the prosecutrix/complainant seem to have amicably settled their differences and accordingly a joint application under Section 320 CrPC, supported by affidavits of the accused appellant and the prosecutrix/complainant came to be filed which was partly allowed by the High Court by the impugned order dated 21 March, 2023.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/criminal/freedom-of-speech-and-defamation/
The short point arising for consideration of this Court is as to whether the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act and the rejection of the application under Section 320 CrPC was justified and lawful.
The case as projected in the FIR and the sworn testimony of the prosecutrix would reveal that the prosecutrix/complainant was engaged for doing household jobs in the house of the accused appellant who tried to outrage her modesty while the prosecutrix/complainant was doing the household chores.
Section 3(2)( v ) of the Act provides that whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, commits any offence under the Penal Code, 1860 punishable with imprisonment for a term of ten years or more against a person or property on the ground that such person is a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe or such property belongs to such member, shall be punishable with imprisonment for life and with fine.
Considered in light of the above factual and legal position, we are of the opinion that the conviction of the accused appellant for the offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act was otherwise also not sustainable on merits. 6367 of 2023 6 accused appellant as recorded by the trial Court and upheld by the High Court for the offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act is hereby set aside and quashed.
Case Title: DASHRATH SAHU Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH (2024 INSC 68)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000487-000487 / 2024
