Legal Insights: Dashrath Sahu v. State Of Chhattisgarh - Recent Supreme Court Ruling

Written by:

Adv Shubham Jindal

Updated: 08-03-2024

Categories

General Legal issues

Common Marriage Problems

Property Issues

Bail

Marriage and Divorce

Cyber Fraud

startup

RERA

Current Affairs

corporate

statutory Compliances

Case Law

Share with your community:

The trial courtroom had convicted the accused-appellant of offenses below Sections 451 (House-trespass), 354 (Assault on a girl with a purpose to surprise her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code, and Section three(1) (xi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

In the case at hand, the accused allegedly tried to outrage the modesty of the complainant while she began performing domestic tasks on the accused appellant's living.

The accused-appellant filed a project to the order of the Chhattisgarh High Court. This ruling denied the appellant and complainant's joint application underneath Section 320 of the Cr. P.C. For the offense punishable beneath Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The appellant becomes convicted of violating Sections 451 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1) (xi) of the SC/ST Act. The High Court in part authorized the combined software for IPC crimes, acquitting the appellant, but brushed off it for the SC/ST Act offense.

Issue:

“Whether the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act and the rejection of the application under Section 320 CrPC was justified and lawful?”

Judgment:

The Court stated that the accused reportedly sought to offend the prosecutrix's modesty, however, there was no evidence that he was supposed to be a person from the Scheduled Caste. The Bench, which included Justice BR Gavai, Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, and Justice Sandeep Mehta, said, "A simple studying of the segment makes it clear that the offense of outraging the modesty must be dedicated with the specific intention that the sufferer belonged to the Scheduled Caste category".

The section states that “Whoever, now not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, assaults or makes use of pressure on any girl belonging to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe with the reason to dishonor or outrage her modesty will be punishable with imprisonment for some time not less than six months, however, may increase to five years and with nice.”

The relevant law stipulates that Whoever, not being a member of a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe, assaults or uses force on any woman belonging to a Scheduled Caste or a Scheduled Tribe with the intent to dishonor or outrage her modesty shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term not less than six months but may extend to five years and with fine.”

Following a complete examination of the FIR and the prosecutrix's sworn testimony contained in the judgments of both the High Court and the trial Court, the Apex Court determined that the accused-appellant sought to offend the prosecutrix's modesty whilst she changed into appearing family responsibilities. Despite the maximum severe claims made by the prosecutrix, there was no proof that the accused dedicated the offense intending to target a Scheduled Caste member.

The Court alluded to the case of Masumsha Hasanasha Musalman v. State of Maharashtra [2000(3) SCC 557]. The judgment, in this example, involved an offense below Sections three(2)(v) and 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act. This clause became comparable in that it required the offense to be dedicated towards a member of the Scheduled Castes or Tribes with the goal of caste.

How did this affect the interpretation of the SC/ST (prevention of atrocities) act?

The Supreme Court's decision has prompted the translation of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The Court ruled that the offense of outraging modesty under the SC/ST Act must be committed with the specific intention that the victim belongs to the Scheduled Caste. This judgment installed that the accused's aim is crucial for conviction in SC/ST atrocities cases. As a result, the case has emphasized the want for particular caste-based intent to devote an offense beneath the SC/ST Act, affecting how the act is interpreted in such circumstances.

For extra updates, you could contact Sharks of Law. The Sharks of Law provides knowledge on legal issues and encourages readers to think critically about the issue. You can contact our experienced Advocates for any legal questions

Email:-helpdesk@sharksoflaw.com

Help Desk:-+91-88770-01993