Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ravindra Kumar Ramshankar Mishra vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 31 March, 1995
Equivalent citations: 1995(0)MPLJ645
ORDER I.P. Rao, J.
1. This revision is preferred against the framing of charge by the Special Judge, Raipur under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 by order dated 19-12-1994.
2. The facts of the case are that the applicant who is working as Executive Engineer in M. P. Pollution Control Board is in the habit of harassing Sanjay Kumar Mehra who is working as Assistant Engineer. Baring on the complaint sent by the said Mchra to the Hon'ble Minister, Tribal Welfare Department, Bhopal which was sent to the Collector, Raipur for necessary action, the police have investigated into the case. The statements of the complainant, Dharampal and Ashok Phutane recorded on 25-10-1994 are to the effect that on 24-2-1994 at about 5 p.m. the complainant was insulted by the applicant. The statement given by the complainant docs not elaborate what are the actual words of abuse used by the applicant. But the statement of Dharampal given to the police indicates that the applicant had used the words 'idiot' and 'nonsence' against the complainant. This narration is also corroborated by the statement given by Ashok Phutane.
3. Section 3(1)(x) of the Act is applicable when a person intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to humiliate a member of Scheduled Castes or a Scheduled Tribe in any place within public view. The Act is a special enactment intended to punish atrocities against members of scheduled castes or scheduled tribes and Section 3(1)(x) is attracted only when the alleged insult or intimidation is with intent to humiliate a member belonging to that particular community with reference to the community. It is only such insult or intimidation that is attracted to Section 3(1)(x). The words of abuse attributed to the applicant by Dharampal and Ashok Phutane against the complainant are only 'idiot' and 'nonsense' which have no reference to the community and from those words it cannot be inferred that the intention or intimidation are with reference, to the community to which the complainant belongs.
4. Hence criminal revision is allowed and charge under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act is set aside. This, however, does not preclude the prosecution from prosecuting the applicant under the general provisions of Penal Code, if any.
CC be given on usual charges.