Delhi District Court
Bhatnagar And Others vs . State 109 (2004) Dlt 915 Has Observed "I on 30 March, 2017
IN THE COURT OF SH. JAGDISH KUMAR
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (WEST-02), DELHI.
IN THE MATTER OF :
New Case no. 57410/16
FIR no. : 432/14
PS : Paschim Vihar
State (NCT of Delhi)
Through Public Prosecutor
Versus
Deepak ........Accused
Order on Charge:
1.Vide this order I shall determine whether material placed on record shows prima facie sufficient evidence against the accused or not for framing of charge.
2. Ld. Counsel for accused has only argued on the point that no charge is made out against the accused U/S 3 (I) (X) & (XI) of SC&ST Act. Ld. Counsel for accused has not argued on the alleged offences U/s 323/341/509 IPC as charge sheet has also been filed against the accused of alleged offences under these sections.
3. It is argued that no castiest remarks were uttered by the accused persons to the complainant. It is further argued that, if for the sake of argument, the version of the complainant is admitted to CR No. 57410/16 Page no. : 1 of 4 be correct, that castiest remarks were uttered by the accused towards complainant then it also not constitute any offence against the accused under the provisions of SC & ST Act as there is no public person was present at the time of occurrence of offence. It is further argued that accused has been falsely implicated by the complainant in the present case.
4. On the other hand, it is argued by Ld. Addl. PP for the State that it is not necessary to constitute the offence under SC & ST Act, that public persons must be present and word the 'public view' should not be construed as there must be public witnesses in whose presence castiest remarks would have been uttered. It is also argued by Ld. Addl. PP for State that offence U/s 323/341/509 IPC are made out against the accused persons in addition of offence U/s SC & ST Act.
5. Having given consideration, being made by the Ld. Counsel for accused and Ld. APP for State I would like to mention here the settled proposition of law which has to be considered at the time of framing of charge. At the time of framing of charge the court has to consider whether there is prima-facie evidence there on record which prima-facie indicates the offence being committed by the accused person. It is not necessary that the court has to look into the evidence being before the Court that the evidence will amount to conviction of the accused. To constitute offence U/s 3 (1) (x) SC & ST Act the insult or humiliation of a person of SC & ST community, must be in any place within 'public view'.
CR No. 57410/16 Page no. : 2 of 4
6. It is also a settled proposition of law that at the stage of charge the court is not required to examine the evidence set up by the State minutely or bit by bit so as to carry out a detailed examination of trial which is to be left at the stage of evidence itself. Reliance can be placed upon the judgment titled as State V. S. Bangarappa AIR 2001 SC 222.
7. Here in the present case there is only one public witness whose statement has been recorded by the IO U/S 161 Cr.P.C namely Mukesh who stated that in his presence no castiest remarks were uttered. Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in case titled as Daya Bhatnagar and others Vs. State 109 (2004) DLT 915 has observed "I accordingly hold that expression within 'public view' occurring in Section 3 (1) (x) of the Act means within the view which includes hearing, knowledge or accessibility also, of a group of people of the place or locality / village as distinct from view who are not private and are as good as strangers and not linked with the complainant through any close relationship or any business, commercial or any other vested interest and who are not participating members with him in any way. If such group of people comprises anyone of these it would not satisfy the requirement of 'public view' within the meaning of expression used.
8. So in view of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Delhi the facts of the present case does not constitute the offence U/s 3 (1)
(x) of SC / ST Act as there is no public witness as envisaged U/s 3 (1) (X) of SC & ST Act. The offence U/s 3 (1) (xi) is made out against the accused as accused has beaten as well as abused (gali galoch) CR No. 57410/16 Page no. : 3 of 4 to the complainant as it is not necessary that the offence of the section must be in 'public view'. The fact whether accused knows the caste of complainant or not is a matter of trial.
9. From perusal of file, it also reveals that the offence U/s 323/341/509 IPC is also made out against the accused.
10. The case be listed for framing of charge against the accused on 01.05.2017.
ANNOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 30.03.2017 (JAGDISH KUMAR) ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE (WEST-02):DELHI CR No. 57410/16 Page no. : 4 of 4