THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1063 of 2007 04-12-2014 BETWEEN:
Vempatapu Ganneyya And others.
…..Appellants/A.1 to A.5 AND State of A.P., Rep. by the Public Prosecutor, High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of A.P.
…..Respondent THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1063 of 2007 JUDGMENT:
The Criminal Appeal is preferred by the appellants/A.1 to A.5 against the Judgment dated 03.08.2007 passed in S.C. No.15 of 2004, by the Court of Special Judge for trial of cases under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act-cum-I Additional Sessions Judge, Srikakulam, whereby the learned Judge convicted A.1 to A.4 for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, and accordingly sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months each and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) each, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of fifteen days each. Further, the Court below convicted A.1 to A.5 for the offence under Section 4/Section 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month each and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- (Rupees five hundred only) each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of seven days each.
The complaint, Ex.P.1, basing on which a case is registered, reads as follows.
On 15.07.2003 at 4.00 p.m., while Manda Kanakamma and Potnuru Yerramma belong to SC caste are collecting water from the tap, the Rajaka Caste people Vempatapu Gannayya and his wife Vempatapu Venkati abused them in their caste name as “Mala Lanjallara” and insulted them and threw away the metal pot (binde) and damaged the tap and put a stick obstructing the flow of water. In that connection, a report was given to Police and on that the C.I., and S.I., called both parties and compromised the matter in view of the law and order problem. Due to the respect of the Revenue and Police officials, we agreed for compromise and went to our village. But, on the next day, they threatened that is there any fear to them if they report the matter to Police, except this the “Mala Lanjakoduku” cannot do any other thing and they resolved to boycott from washing the clothes of untouchable Lanjakodukulu and they held a meeting and their son Apparao abused them and since then they stopped washing their clothes. The said fact is also intimated to Police.
After knowing the same fact, their village Rajaka person Namavarapu Ravi and his mother Ramanamma behaved indecently and abused raising the caste name as Mala Lanja against Potnuru Yerramma, W/o Anipoli of SC person and they abused and assaulted them and threatened to do away the Mala people by bombing. The said incident is also intimated to Police. Due to the pressure of our village Sarpanch Nethi Ramarao, the Police cannot do justice to them.
As such the Rajaka people are defaming them on every day in their caste name and threatening to do away our lives and creating terror. The matters are reported to the Police, Ponduru P.S., under Receipt Nos.40, 42 and 45, but no action is taken till now. There is no protection to us and we are apprehending danger to our lives in the hands of above persons. On 28.09.2003 night also the Rajaka caste people came in drunken state and abused the Mala people in their caste name and that they cannot remove their hair and there is no protection to them and so the Police personnel may take necessary action and register cases against them.
To substantiate the case of the prosecution, during the course of trial, P.Ws.1 to 7 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.5 were marked.
D.W.1 was examined and no documentary evidence was marked on behalf of the accused.
On appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence and on hearing the arguments on both sides, the Court below convicted the appellants/accused for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs (PoA) Act and Section 4/Section 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, and accordingly sentenced them as stated above. Aggrieved thereby, the present Criminal Appeal is preferred by appellants/A.1 to A.5.
Heard and perused the entire material available on record.
The independent witnesses i.e., P.Ws.1 to 5 deposed before the Court regarding two occurrences; i.e., (i) in connection with the occurrence on 15.07.2003, wherein the accused abused the witnesses and also damaged the water pipe and also abused them by touching upon the caste name; and (ii) in connection with the occurrence on 25.08.2003, wherein the accused plucked the plants of P.W.5. Aggrieved over the said acts, they lodged a complaint on 29.09.2003. According to the witnesses, the first occurrence was on 15.07.2003 and the second occurrence was on 25.08.2003, whereas complaint was lodged on 29.09.2003. In the complaint, they alleged that the accused abused them as “Mala Lanjallara” and also abused them on 28.09.2003 and threatening them in a drunken condition. Further, after the occurrence on 15.07.2003, it is alleged that the accused (washermen community) boycotted from washing the clothes of Scheduled Caste people.
On a reading of the entire evidence, it is evident that there were disputes between the accused and the scheduled caste people. The witnesses did not specifically state the manner in which the words are uttered and also did not specifically state the words uttered by each of the accused concerned. It is also evident from Ex.P.1, and also their evidence that they have alleged that all the accused abused them in the name of the caste. Hence, unless it is clearly mentioned and proved by the prosecution that the words allegedly uttered by each of the accused, it cannot be held that all the accused in chorus abused the accused as alleged by the witnesses.
Further, except the self-serving statements of P.Ws.1 to 5, no other evidence is available on record to show that when the occurrences took place in the month of July and August, 2003, the victims lodged a complaint and the issues are settled by the then Mandal Revenue Officer and the other elder persons in the Panchayat. The prosecution has failed to examine any of the panchayatdars to prove that the Panchayat was held and in that panchayat, the issues between the victims and the accused were settled. Since the complaint was lodged after due deliberations, the possibility of implicating the accused for an offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs (PoA) Act cannot be ruled out. Hence, the conviction and sentence imposed by the Court below against A.1 to A.4 for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs (PoA) Act is liable to be set aside and is accordingly set aside.
This Court, considering the evidence of P.Ws.1 to 5, is of the view that the accused ill-treated P.Ws.1 to 5 and certainly the act of the accused would attract an offence under Section 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act. Hence, the conviction imposed by the Court below against the appellants/A.1 to A.5 for the offence under Section 4/Section 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act is hereby confirmed.
At this stage, the learned counsel for the appellants/A.1 to A.5 confine his arguments with regard to quantum of sentence, and submit that as the appellants/A.1 to A.5 are the only breadwinners in their respective families and they have to lookafter their children, lenient view may be taken by this Court while imposing sentence of imprisonment.
Considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants/A.1 to A.5 and the nature of offence, and also in view of long lapse of time, this Court is inclined to take a lenient view.
In the result, the conviction and sentence recorded by the Court below against appellants 1 to 4/A.1 to A.4 for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the SCs and STs (PoA) Act is set aside and they are acquitted of the said charge. The fine amount, if any, paid by them, shall be refunded to them. The conviction imposed by the Court below against the appellants/A.1 to A.5 for the offence under Section 4/Section 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act is confirmed. However, this Court, taking a lenient view, modifies and reduces the sentence of imprisonment to the period, which the appellants/A.1 to A.5 have already undergone. The sentence of fine and default condition, imposed by the Court below, is not interfered with.
The Criminal Appeal is accordingly partly allowed. Consequently, miscellaneous applications, if any pending in this appeal, shall stand closed.
JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 04.12.2014 pln