SC/ST Act
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 10 November 2009
This query is : Resolved
Dear Sir,
I want to have some clarifications regarding the above subject.
1. Whether is it possible to file a case under SC/ST Act,
Sec.3(1)(X)when an incident occurs in a private building? In the
recent judgement of Madras High Court it was stated that even if the
offence occurs inside before some friends and relatives it is enough
and there is public view which is an offence. Whether it is correct?
2. The Bombay High Court had given a judgement in Crl.W.P.No.2593/2008
(Mrs.Pushpa Vijay Bonde vs. MH state police) that the complainant
should have mentioned in his complaint had told the accused that he
belongs to SC/ST community and if there was no mention in his complaint
and deposition it was not an offence under Sec.3. It had cited the Apex
Court judgement Ashabai Machindra Adhagale's case. I want to get a copy
of the above Apex Court judgement. How can I get it?
3. SC/ST Rule 7(2) it is stated that the investigating officer should
complete the investigation within 30 days. As per records he had
obtained depositions from the Prosecution Witnesses on the next date of
FIR (26.02.2009), obtained the deposition from one PW (Tasildhar) on
05.07.2004 regarding the community of the accused and filed his charge
sheet in the JM-II court on 06.07.2004. The investigation conducted
beyond 30 days is against the said rule. Whether my contention is
correct?
4. In the statements of PW1-10 stated that A3 was the brother of A1, but PW11(DSP) in his statement noted A3 as the son of A1. This is wrong. Whether the charge sheet can be proved as false? Is there any ruling for it?
On 10.11.09 I have sent the queries 1-3, but they were neither found in the list nor answered.
I shall be thankful if my queries are answered.
MD ABDUL KADHER, TN
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 10 November 2009
This contradiction of PW1 -10 and pW 11 can be highlighted at the time of argument.
adv. rajeev ( rajoo )
(Expert) 10 November 2009
on the statment of the PW 1-10 and 11 it cannot be proved that chargesheet is false. It requires to go thru., the contradictions & admissions given by the wittneses
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 10 November 2009
I request kindly to reply for my questions
1-3. Please give assistance for defense.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 10 November 2009
The first quarry you raised is about the judgement of MP High court. In my view public view used in the Act means in the eyes of general public (2 or more persons). If those persons are present even within a private building and such an offence is committed then certainly it should be treated as committed because it is a public view.
It is true that the complainant shoudl tell in complaint specifically that he had told his caste to the accused persons or that they already new his caste. In the absence of such averment in the complaint, i is fatal. I can traeout the citation of the apex Court as your referred given sufficient time.
Even if investigation has not been completed within 29 days, it is not for the benefit of the accused rather it is presumed that by not completing the investigation within the stipulated 30 days, the State has harrassd the complainant. No benenfit can be derived by the accused person in such delay.As you are an advocate, we all take due benefit of all the contradictions either arose uring evidence or otherwise but on this ground the FIR cannot be quashed.
