- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF JULY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 200083 OF 2019 (374(Cr.PC)/415(BNSS)) BETWEEN KHAJA HUSSAIN S/O SHARMUDDIN JAMADAR AGED 45 YEARS OCC. AGRICULTURE R/O KEMBHAVI YADGIR DIST. 584 101 ... APPELLANT (BY SRI.RAVI K. ANOOR, ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE THROUGH KEMBHAVI POLICE STATION YADGIR DIST. NOW REP. BY ADDL. SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT KALABURAGI BENCH – 585 107 2. SMT.BASALINGAMMA W/O TIPPANNA KATTIMANI AGED 40 YEARS OCC.HOUSEHOLD R/O KEMBHAVI, SHORAPUR TALUK DIST. YADGIR – 585 216 … RESPONDENTS (BY SRI.JAMADAR SHAHABUDDIN, HCGP FOR R1; VIDE ORDER DATED 9.9.2024, R2 IS SERVED) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 374 (2) OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF CONVICTION DATED 24.05.2019 PASSED BY THE SESSIONS JUDGE, SPECIAL COURT AT YADGIRI IN (S.C.NO.35/2013 Digitally signed by SREEDHARAN BANGALORE SUSHMA LAKSHMI Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTION 323, 504 OF IPC UNDER SECTION 3(1)(X), 3(1)(XI) OF SC/ST (P.A.) ACT. THIS APPEAL HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 24.03.2025 AT KALABURAGI BENCH, COMING ON FOR ‘PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT’, BEFORE THE PRINCIPAL BENCH AT BENGALURU, THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH CAV JUDGMENT (PER: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S RACHAIAH) 1. This appeal has been filed by the accused being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 24.05.2019 in Special Case No.35/2013 on the file of the Sessions Judge, Special Court, Yadgiri, wherein the Trial Court recorded the conviction of the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 of Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) and under Sections 3(1)(x) and 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short ‘SC/ST (POA) Act’) 2. The ranks of the parties henceforth will be considered as per their rankings before the Trial Court, for convenience. - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 Factual matrix of the case: 3. It is the case of the prosecution that, on 09.07.2013, the complainant was working as a Safayi at Kembhavi Gram Panchayat. On that day, she was entrusted the work of cleaning from Payappa Katta to Post Office, some other workers were also accompanied her and doing their works respectively. At about 10.30 A.M, the accused person came there and started abusing the complainant in a filthy language by saying that she is not cleaning properly and also abused by taking the name of caste as “Ye Holeya Randi” and slapped on her cheek. When the co-workers, namely, Lakshmibai and Thippanna came to rescue the complainant, they have also been abused by naming their caste as “Holeya Sule Makkalu” and pushed them. On hearing the said hue and cry, all the other workers who were working in the said premises gathered there to protest the assault. Again, he used filthy language and abused by naming the caste. 4. A complaint came to be registered by the complainant against the accused before the respondent-police. The respondent-police after registering the case, conducted the investigation and submitted the charge-sheet. - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 5. To prove the case of the prosecution, the prosecution examined 20 witnesses and got marked 08 documents as Exs.P1 to P8. On the other hand, the letter of the panchayat is marked as Ex-D.1 by the defence evidence. The Trial Court after having considering the oral and documentary evidence on record opined that, the petitioner has committed the offences stated supra. 6. Heard Sri.Ravi K.Anoor, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Jamadar Shahabuddin, learned HCGP for respondent No.1. Respondent is served and unrepresented. 7. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that the Trial Court committed error for the reasons that the findings of interested witnesses have not been assessed properly. The impugned judgment is perverse and tenable for the reason that it has to be passed by considering the independent witnesses. 8. It is further submitted that all the witnesses are the interested witnesses. They deliberately filed a false case in order to harass the accused. - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 9. It is further submitted that in the absence of specific allegations regarding the name of the caste, the conviction in respect of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, ought to have been recorded. Further, the learned counsel for the appellant submitted that since the Trial Court did not properly appreciate the case of the prosecution, the judgment of conviction has to be set aside. Making such submissions, the learned counsel for the appellant/accused prays to allow the appeal. 10. Per Contra, the learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 - State, vehemently, justified the judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court and he further submitted that the complainant and her co-workers who were working in the vicinity are the best witnesses to speak about the abuse of the accused by naming the caste of complainant and others. The prosecution has proved the case regarding other offences by examining independent eye-witnesses. Therefore, the conviction of the appellant/accused is proper and appropriate. There is no reason to interfere with the findings of the Trial Court. Hence, the appeal has to be rejected. - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 11. Having heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and also perused the findings of the Trial Court in recording the conviction, it is appropriate at this stage to refer the evidence of all the witnesses for the purpose of re- appreciation. 12. P.W.1 – Rangappa stated to be the Mahazar witness. The said Mahazar is marked as Ex.P.1. He supported the case. 13. P.W.2 is also a co-worker, she belongs to the Scheduled Caste. According to her, when she along with others, were doing sweeping work in front of the office, the accused had assaulted Basalingamma on her face and also abused all of them by naming their caste as Holeya and Madiga and insulted them in public. Though she has been subjected to cross- examination, nothing has been elicited to discredit her evidence. 14. Similarly, P.W.3 - Thippanna also supported the case of the prosecution in respect of assault and insult by naming the caste of Basalingamma. - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 15. P.W.4 to P.W.11 are the witnesses who supported the case of the prosecution regarding the incident, nothing has been elicited to discredit their evidence. Therefore, the evidence of these witnesses has been properly scrutinized by the Trial Court. No reasons to interfere with the said appreciation. 16. P.W.12 is an independent witness, he was working as a Bill Collector in the Panchayat office. He stated in his evidence that the complainant, C.W.4 to C.W.12 were working in the office and he stated that all of them belonged to the Scheduled Caste. Hence, he is the hearsay witness to the incident. 17. Similarly, P.W.13 is an independent witness, working in the same Panchayat office as an Assistant. He did not support the case of the prosecution in respect of abuse by naming the caste of the complainant and others. 18. P.W.14, also working in the Gram Panchayat as a Pump Operator, he also turned hostile. - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 19. P.W.15 was working as a Sweeper, he did not support the case. P.W.16, also working in the said office as a Pump Operator, he did not support the case. 20. P.W.17 was working as another Bill Collector, he is also a hearsay witness. P.W.19 and P.W.20 are the Police officials stated to have conducted the investigation and submitted the charge-sheet. 21. On careful reading of the evidence of all these witnesses, it appears from the record that, the complainant, P.Ws.4 to 14 are the witnesses. They deposed about the incident and also the insult made to the accused in respect of the caste of the complainant and others. It is an admitted fact that, the complainant and P.W.4 to P.W.14 are the employees of the said Gram Panchayat Office as Sweepers and it is also an admitted fact that, the accused was running a Pan Shop in front of the said Gram Panchayat office. The findings of the Trial Court in recording the conviction in respect of offences under the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, is proper and appropriate. However, sofaras the conviction in respect of other two offences, namely, 323 and 504 of IPC are concerned, the Investigating Officer - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 ought to have sent the complainant for medical examination to substantiate the assault. However, in this case, no such certificate has been obtained to demonstrate the assault. Therefore, in the absence of medical certificate to prove the assault, the findings of the Trial Court in respect of the assault appears to be unreasonable and cannot be believed. Therefore, the conviction for the offence under Section 323 of IPC has to be set aside. 22. In the light of the observations made above, I proceed to pass the following: ORDER i) The Criminal Appeal is allowed in-part. ii) The judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 24.05.2019 passed in Special Case No.35/2013 by the learned Sessions Judge, Special Court, Yadagiri, is modified. iii) The conviction in respect of the offence punishable under Section 323 of IPC is hereby set aside. - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC-K:3863 CRL.A No. 200083 of 2019 iv) The remaining sentences are maintained as per the order of the Trial Court. v) The Registry is directed to transmit the record along with this order for execution of the sentence in accordance with law. Sd/- (S RACHAIAH) JUDGE NM List No.: 19 Sl No.: 1