2025:CGHC:6853 HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR Cr.A.No. 655 of 2005 Puranram, S/o. Dukhatiran Janghel, aged about 30 years, R/o. Village – Borai, P.S. – Chuikhadan, District - Durg (C.G.) ---- Appellant Versus State of Chhattisgarh --- Respondent ______________________________________________________________________ For the Appellant : Shri Ashutosh Trivedi, Advocate appeared on behalf of Shri Rupesh Trivedi, Advocate. For State / Respondent : Ms. M. Asha, Panel Lawyer. ______________________________________________________________________ Hon'ble Shri Justice Sachin Singh Rajput Judgment on Board 28/02/2025 1. This appeal under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘CrPC’) has been filed by the appellant, being aggrieved by the judgment dated 27/07/2005 passed in Special case No. 94/2004 by the Special Judge, Rajnandgaon, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) by which the appellant has been convicted and sentenced in the following manner: Conviction Sentence Under Sections 323 of IPC R.I. for 03 months and fine of Rs.100/- in default of fine additional S.I. for 15 days. Under Sections 294 of IPC R.I. for 01 month and fine of Rs.100/- in default of fine additional S.I. for 03 months Under Sections 3(1)(10) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities )Act, 1989) 06 months R.I. and fine of Rs.500/- in default of fine additional S.I. for 03 months. All the sentences are run concurrently ASHISH TIWARI Digitally signed by ASHISH TIWARI Date: 2025.04.08 18:08:11 +0530 -2- 2. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that, on 09/07/2004 complainant had gone to the house of Tahal Singh for the inviting him in 6th Day of function Chatti at his home. Pardesi, Leela, Sunder, Puran and other persons were sitting there. When the complainant came out and was sitting near the platform. At that time Leela and Puram came out from the house of Tahal Singh and filthily abused him in the name of Caste and assaulted by the appellant upon which the complainant sustained injuries on various parts of the body. Incident was witnessed by Amol Singh (PW- 1), Dhanesh Ram (PW-2) and Jaykaran (PW-3). People’s who were present at the spot have brought him to home. Thereafter, Tahalram and Kalaram admitted him to the Hospital. Thereafter, Amol Singh (PW-1) lodged an FIR at Police Station – Chuikhadan, District – Rajnandgaon (C.G.) and investigation was set on motion. Appellants were arrested vide Ex.P/8 and Ex.P/9. Spot map was prepared. Caste certificate of the complainant was seized vide Ex.P/3 and Ex.P/4. 3. Statement of the witnesses were record and after due investigation the charge sheet was filed before J.M.F.C., Khairgarh against the accused persons. The same was committed to the Sessions Court, who made over the case to the learned trial court. 4. The appellant was charged for an offense punishable under sections 323, 294 of the I.P.C. and 3(1)(10) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘Special Act’). He denied the charges and claimed to be tried. 5. In order to bring home the guilt of the appellant, prosecution has examined 08 witnesses and exhibited as many as 09 documents. 6. The learned trial court after appreciation of evidence available on record, convicted and sentence the appellant as stated in paragraph one of this judgment. 7. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that the prosecution was unable to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. He submits that the prosecution was -3- unable to prove that the complainant – Amol Singh (PW-1) belongs to Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes. He submits that the caste certificate was issued by Tahsildaar after the incident and which is not competent authority to issue such certificate. He placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court in Pilla Bai and ors. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in (2023) 3 CGLJ 1. Even otherwise he submits that from the statement of Amol Singh (PW-1) it does not appear that he was filthily abuse in the name of Caste and he is not also stated that as a result of which he felt bad. He submits that appellant already remained in judicial custody from 25/08/2004 to 27/08/2004 and the incident is of the year – 2004. He further submits that the appellant is now of ripe age and faced litigation for almost 21 years and he must have reformed in the society by now and that he never misused liberty. Apart from this he submits that in the event acquittal of the appellant under the provisions of Special Act for his conviction under sections 294, 323 of the IPC, as he has already remained in jail for 02 days, the sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced to the period already undergone. 8. Per contra, State Counsel opposing the submissions and submits that the learned trial court gave a meritorious finding has been recorded on the assessment of the evidence, therefore it does not require any interference. 9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their rival submission and also perused the record with utmost circumspection. 10. First question which comes to determination before this court is to whether the prosecution was able to bring home the guilt of the appellant under section of Special Act. Perusal of record indicates that the caste certificate was issued by Tahsildaar which is marked as Ex.P/3. This Court relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Ku. Madhuri Patil v. Addl. Commissioner, Tribal Development reported in AIR 1995 SC 94 in the case of Pilla Bai (supra) has observed as under :– -4- “21. The procedure for issuance of caste certificate has been well prescribed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Kumari 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.” 11. Even otherwise from the perusal of Amol Singh (PW -1), it does not appears that he was filthily abused in the name of Caste by the appellant as result of he felt bad. The word which has been simply stated by the PW-1 is that he belongs to the lower Caste no specific Caste was mentioned. Though PW-2 stated that the appellant filthily abused by Amol Singh (PW-1) by speaking words Godiya, itself does not appear to this Court sufficient to attract the provision of Special Act as the same was not been stated by Amol Singh (PW-1). Therefore, in the opinion of this Court the prosecution was unable to bring home the guilt of the appellant under section 3(1)(x) of Special Act beyond reasonable doubt. His conviction under section of Special Act is hereby set aside. 12. Next question is whether the appellant can be convicted under section 323 and 294 of the IPC from the evidence Amol Singh (PW-1). He deposed that the appellant has assaulted him with hand and fist. On considering the medical examination which has been proved by Dr. Rehman (PW-8) and obscene words spoken by the appellants offence under section 323 and 294 of the IPC is made out. -5- 13. Taking into the consideration mitigating factors as submitted by learned counsel for the appellants and that the incident occurred in the year 2004, considering the fact that there is nothing to show that the appellant has ever misused the liberty, that by now he must have attained the ripe age, that the appellant remained in jail for 02 days, this Court is inclined to reduce the sentence to the period already undergone by him. Fine amount is not disturbed. Appeal, thus partly allowed. 14. Since the appellant is reported to be on bail, his bail bond shall remain in force for a period of six months from today in view of the provision of Section 481 of BNSS, 2023. 15. The record be sent back to the trial Court along with a copy of this judgment for necessary compliance and information. Sd/- (Sachin Singh Rajput) Judge Ashish