Supreme Court Acquits Accused in SC & ST Act Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Lack of Public View.


07 April 2025 Acquittal >> Criminal Law   |   Criminal Appeals & Suspension of Sentence >> Criminal Law   |   Evidence >> Criminal Law  

The Supreme Court of India in Hutu Ansari at Futu Ansar & Others v/s The State of Jharkhand., has acquitted five appellants who were convicted by the Trial Court and later by the High Court under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 3 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC & ST Act). The apex court found "gross inconsistencies" between the initial complaint and the oral evidence presented, particularly regarding the place of occurrence and the presence of the public, which is a crucial element for offenses under certain clauses of the SC & ST Act.

The case stemmed from a land dispute between the complainant's family and the accused. Following a legal battle, the accused were compelled to hand over the disputed land to the complainant's family in April 2005. The alleged incident leading to the charges occurred shortly after, in May 2005, when the appellants and other accused were accused of trespassing and using caste-based derogatory terms against the complainants.


 

 

The prosecution was initiated based on a complaint alleging house trespass, breaking a lock, theft, and the use of casteist slurs in front of villagers. However, during the trial, the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, all related to the complainants, presented a different narrative. They claimed the incident occurred in a field, not inside the house, and crucially, one of the key witnesses explicitly stated in cross-examination that no villagers were present at the time of the alleged abuse.

The Trial Court convicted the accused, a decision partially upheld by the High Court, which modified the sentence. However, upon appeal to the Supreme Court, the bench noted the significant discrepancies in the prosecution's case.

The Supreme Court highlighted that for offenses under clauses (r) and (s) of Section 3(1) of the SC & ST Act (intentional insult/intimidation and abuse by caste name), the derogatory remarks must be made in a place within public view. Given the categorical statement by a prosecution witness that no members of the public were present, these clauses were deemed not applicable.

Regarding clause (f) of Section 3(1) (wrongful occupation of land belonging to a member of SC/ST), the court found no allegation in the complaint that the complainants were forcefully evicted or that the accused illegally occupied the land after its handover. Furthermore, the oral evidence failed to support the initial complaint of house trespass.

Based on these inconsistencies and the lack of evidence to satisfy the requirements of the specific clauses of the SC & ST Act invoked, the Supreme Court found no grounds to uphold the convictions. Consequently, the apex court set aside the orders of the Magistrate and the High Court, acquitting the appellants. The appellants' bail bonds were also ordered to be cancelled.

This judgment underscores the importance of consistent and credible evidence in criminal cases, particularly those involving stringent laws like the SC & ST Act, and emphasizes the necessity of proving the elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt, including the crucial aspect of "public view" for certain categories of offenses under the Act.


Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989  

Section 447., Indian Penal Code - 1860  

Indian Penal Code, 1860