Representative photo of Indian domestic helper.
Credit: iStock photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said that a man charged with the offence of using force or assault against a woman belonging to Scheduled Caste to dishonour or outrage her modesty can be convicted only if the crime was committed just because the victim belonged to such a category.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai, Prashant Kumar Mishra and Sandeep Mehta set aside the conviction of appellant Dashrath Sahu under Section 3(1)(xi) of the Scheduled Castes/ Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
In the case, the Chhattisgarh High Court reduced the sentence from one year to six months imprisonment even though the appellant filed a compromise agreement with the victim, his domestic help. The HC said the offence under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Prevention of Atrocities Act was not compoundable.
However, it partly allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused of the offences punishable under Sections 354 and 451 IPC.
Dealing with his appeal, the bench noted as per the FIR, the victim was engaged for doing household jobs and the appellant tried to outrage her modesty when she was doing the household chores.
"Apparently thus, even from the highest allegations of the prosecutrix, the offending act was not committed by the accused with the intention that he was doing so upon a person belonging to the Scheduled Caste," the bench said.
Referring to the Supreme Court's previous judgment in case of 'Masumsha Hasanasha Musalman Vs State of Maharashtra' (2000), the bench said, "The language of Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act is pari materia as the same also provides that the offence must be committed upon a person belonging to Scheduled Castes or Scheduled Tribes with the intention that it was being done on the ground of caste."
Examining the issue whether the conviction of the appellant was justified and lawful, the bench said, "A plain reading of the section makes it clear that the offence of outraging the modesty should be committed with the intention that the victim belonged to the Scheduled Caste category."
"We are of the opinion that the conviction of the accused appellant for the offence under Section 3(1)(xi) of the SC/ST Act was otherwise also not sustainable on merits," the bench said, acquitting the accused.