Gujarat High Court: In an appeal against an order dated 22 May 2012 (impugned order), passed by the trial court for offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506(2), and 114, Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 3(1), (10), Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act), the Single Judge Bench of Sanjeev J. Thaker, J, dismissed the appeal and held that not every insult would amount to an offence under the SC/ST Act.
Background
According to the prosecution, the children of Accused 2 and 3 had been sitting in an open plot opposite the house of the complainant, who had objected to their presence. Upon learning this, Accused 2 and 3 had come to the spot and begun abusing the complainant. Shortly thereafter, Accused 1 and 4 had also arrived armed with a stick and allegedly used caste-based derogatory words against the complainant in public and threatened him not to disclose the incident.
Based on this incident, a complaint had been filed alleging offences under Sections 323, 504, 506(2), and 114 IPC and Section 3(1), (10), SC/ST Act. After investigation, a chargesheet had been filed, and the case was committed to the Sessions Court. After evaluating the evidence, the trial court, vide the impugned order, held that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted the accused.
Analysis, Law and Decision
Upon consideration of the material on record, the Court noted that at the time of the complaint, the complainant had alleged that 8 to 10 people had gathered and were all abusing, but had failed to take any names. Furthermore, several discrepancies and contradictions had been found in the oral evidence of the witnesses.
The Court also referred to the case of Sajan Sakhariya v. State of Kerala, wherein the Supreme Court had observed that not every insult or intimidation would amount to an offence under Section 3(1)(x), SC/ST Act unless such insult or intimidation is started at a victim because he is a member of a particular Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes.
The Court held that the prosecution had failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt and thus, upheld the impugned judgment recorded by the trial court.
[State of Gujarat v. Thakor Talaji Kunwarji, R. Crl. A. No. 1323 of 2012, decided on 25-2-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the Appellant: Shruti Pathak, APP
For the Respondent: Jigar G. Gadavi, Advocate