1 2025:CGHC:11825 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRA No. 948 of 2005 1 - Rajesh Chauhan S/o Prem Singh Chauhan Aged about 23 years. 2.- Anil Kumar S/o – Ganesh Sambalwar Aged about 22 years, both Residence of Village -Ramnagar Power House Kailashnagar Distt. – Rajnandgaon (CG) ... Appellant (s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Though Police Station – Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribe (Special Cell) Distt. Rajnandgaon (CG) ... Respondent (s) For Appellant (s) : Shri Basant Dewangan, Advocate For Respondent / State : Shri Ankur Kashyap, Dy.G.A. ({Hon’ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput}) Judgment on Board 10/03/2025 The appellants have filed this appeal under Section 374 (2) of CrPC assailing legality, correctness and judicial propriety of the judgment dated 23/11/2005 passed by the Special Judge, Rajnandgaon (CG) in Special Case No.36/2005 by which the appellants have been convicted and sentenced in the following manner - Conviction Sentence 1 U/s 3 (1) (x) of the R.I. of 6 months and fine of Rs.500/- each (In 2 Prevention of Atrocities Act default of payment of fine, 2 months simple imprisonment) 2. Case of the prosecution in nutshell is that on the date of incident i.e. 21/02/2005, complainant – Rani Baghmare (PW4) was all alone in her home and her husband and her mother were in a dhhaba situated at Dewada. At about 11:30 in the night, the appellants started banging the door and abused using caste words, upon which, Vinod, Jagat, Raju Shriwas etc. came on the spot and asked them not to filthily abuse. The appellants started assaulting them. They were holding rods in their hands and abusing in the name of caste and went away. She felt bad. In the next morning, when her mother and husband came, she intimated the incident. Thereafter, the report (Ex.P/4) was made in the AJAK police station– Rajnandgaon. Crime was registered and after due investigation, charge sheet was filed. 3. The appellants were charged for an offence punishable under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities Act) 1989 (for short ‘the Act of 1989’). They denied the charges and claimed to be tried. 4. Prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined as many as 7 witnesses and exhibited 8 documents. After due appreciation of evidence on record, learned Trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellants as stated above. 5. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the judgment passed by the learned trial Court is illegal and the prosecution could not prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. It is submitted that the caste certificate has been issued after the date of incident and that too by an incompetent officer without any enquiry. Apart from this, it is submitted that the statement of the witnesses does not inspire confidence. They had given different versions of the alleged incident. It is also 3 submitted that a criminal case is pending against the mother and husband of the complainant on the report of father of the appellants and therefore a false case has been registered against the appellants. It is also submitted that the report is delayed. He placed reliance on the judgment in the case of Pilla Bai v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2023 (3) CGLJ 1. 6. Learned State counsel supports the impugned judgment. 7. The first question arises whether the case against the appellant is made out. The certificate is issued by the Nayab Tahsildar which has been issued on the basis of affidavit and the testimony of the complainant – Rani. In the case of Pilla Bai (supra) this Court relying upon the judgment in the case of Ku. Madhuri Patil v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development, AIR 1995 SC 94 observed as under - “21. The procedure for issuance of caste certificate has been well prescribed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Ku. Madhuri Patil (supra) which laid down the forum and procedure for issuance of/assailing caste certificate and the status of candidate. Thus, in view of the aforesaid dictum of Hon’ble the Supreme Court, the aforesaid caste certificate has no evidentiary value, as it has not been issued by incompetent authority and the prosecution has failed to discharge his burden to prove the caste as discussed above. Apart from this, from the perusal of evidence available on record, it is evident that the appellants have not abused the complainants in filthy language knowing that they belong to Scheduled Tribe Community. This can be fortified from the bare perusal of the statement of the victim – Rupnath.” 8. Apart from this, the defence which has been put forth by the appellants is that on the report of their father, a criminal case is pending against the mother and husband of the complainant. Though the complainant in her statement stated against the appellant but it does not appear as to whether the statement was made with 4 intention to humiliate which is sine qua non for the conviction under Section 3 (1) (x) of the Act of 1989. Durga Bai (PW1) also stated that the appellants were not using filthy language in the name of caste against her daughter and they were saying under an impression that she was inside the house. The evidence on record suggest that there was previous enmity amongst the complainant’s family and the appellants’ family. Apart from this, from perusal of FIR (Ex.P/4), it is reflected that the complaint was typed and submitted on 26/02/2005 which appears to be delayed by 3 - 4 days. Considering all the aspects, this Court is of the opinion that the prosecution was not able bring home the guilt of the appellant and possibility of false implication cannot be ruled out. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence against the present appellants is set aside. The appellants are acquitted of all the charges. 9. Appellants are reported to be on bail. Their bail bonds shall remain in force for a period of six months in view of Section 481 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. 10. A copy of this judgment along with the record of the trial Court be sent back for information and necessary compliance. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) JUDGE Deepti DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Digitally signed by DEEPTI HARIKUMAR Date: 2025.03.19 17:24:42 +0530