JUDGMENT
1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and sentence passed by the Special Judge for trial of cases for Atrocities against Schedule Tribe and Schedule Castes, Mahabubnagar-cum-Additional Sessions Judge, at Khammam. The accused was tried for an offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xii) of S.Cs. and S.Ts. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The brief facts are as follows :-
The complainant, PW-1, is a resident of Kottamvarigudem. She belongs to Schedule Tribe. The accused is a Reddy by caste and is a resident of Amardha. PW1 used to go for coolie work in the field of Gujjula Vinna Reddy, who is the father of the accused. The accused being in dominant position over will of PW1 lured her to marry him and he inhabited with her. The parents of the accused refused their marital relationship. However, the accused left his house and lived with PW-1 in her house at kottamvarigudem for 5 months. In the month of December 1991 the brother of the accused came and took away the accused. From then onwards the accused stopped coming to PW-1. PW-1 and her parents got suspicion and went to the house of the accused in Amardha and asked him to marry PW-1. The accused flatly refused to marry PW-1. By that time PW-1 was pregnant. On 18-4-1992 at 1 p.m. PW-1 along with her parents came to Police Station and gave the complaint and the crime was registered under Section 420, I.P.C. and under Section 3(1)(xii) of Central Act 33/89. On the above facts the learned Judge framed charges under Section 420, I.P.C. and also under Section 3(1)(xii) of the S.Cs. and S.Ts. (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (Central Act 33/89). When the charges were read over and explained to the accused the accused denied the chargers and claimed to be tried.
2. The prosecution to bring out the guilt of the accused examined P.Ws. 1 to 5 and marked Exs. P-1 to P-4. The accused did not lead any evidence.
3. Considering both oral and documentary and other evidence on record the learned Judge found the accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xii) of Central Act 33/89 and he sentenced the accused to undergo imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rupees 1,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months.
4. Aggrieved by the said judgment and sentence the present appeal is filed.
5. There is no dispute in this case that PW-1 belonged to Koya community. She was about 18 years old at the time of the incident. She was going for coolie work to the field of the accused who belonged to Reddy community. PW1 who is the victim in this case stated that the accused promised to many her and therefore she developed intimacy with him. This was also spoken by PW2, who is the father of PW1, This relationship of the PW1 and the accused was disapproved by the parents of the accused. Therefore, the accused came away and lived with PW-1, in the Kottam of PW-2 for 5 months. During that period PW-1 became pregnant and subsequently she delivered a female child. However, when the accused was living with PW-1 in the house of PW-2, there was a caste panchayath of Koyas. PW-3, who is the elder of Koya community, stated that the accused was asked. He told that he could marry PW-1. However the Panchayath imposed him a fine of Rs. 100/-. In the cross-examination he stated that PW-2 paid the fine. It is in the evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 2 that the brother of the accused came and took away from the house of PW2 and from the company of PW-1. Thereafter the accused stopped coming. PW-2 and others went to the house of the accused. When they asked the accused to marry PW-1 he flatly refused. Thereupon, PW-1 presented Ex.P-1, got written by one Bose of Answapuram in the Police Station of Ashwapuram. All these facts are spoken by P.Ws. 1 and 2. PW-4 is the sister of PW-1. She also stated that PW-1 told her that she would marry the accused and none-else. She also testifies the fact that the accused lived in their hut for about 5 months. She also stated that PW-1 became pregnant and delivered a female child. She marked Ex.P-2 which contained the photograph of the accused, his sister, her husband, brother of the accused, PW-1 and a friend of PW-1 Suramma. The photo establishes the relationship of the accused and PW-1. PW-5 is the Doctor who examined the victim girl PW-1, after receiving requisition on 19-4-1992. She found that PW-1 was aged 18 years and she was pregnant by 7th month. All these facts are well established by the prosecution.
6. The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that even assuming the facts are correct, the offence does not fall under the purview of Central Act 33/89. The accused did not seduce PW-1 though he was in the dominant position on the ground that she belonged to the Schedule Tribe to attract Section 3(1)(xii) of the Act. In support of his contention, he relied upon a Judgment of our High Court in Talari Mala Obulesu v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (1992) 3 Andh LT 509. In this case, the accused was charged under Sections 147, 148 and S. 302, r/w. Section 149, IPC. There was nothing to show that attack was made by the accused on the ground that the deceased or injured belonged to S.T. and S.Cs. Therefore, it was held that the case was not liable to be transferred to Special Judge and it was held that the case is not coming within the four corners of Section 3(2)(v) of the Act.
7. I cannot accede to the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellant. The facts of the above case are distinguishable on facts. To attract the provisions of Section 3(2)(v) of Central Act 33/89 an offence under I.P.C. which is punishable for a term of 10 years or more, should have been committed by an upper caste man against a person belonging to Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe on the ground that such a person is member of Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe. In other words, the offence should have been committed primarily basing on the fact that the victim belonged to those castes. Such a requirement is absent under Section 3(1)(xii) of the said Act. The upper caste man should be in a position to dominate the will of a woman belonging to Schedule Caste or Schedule Tribe and he should use the position to exploit her sexually to which she would not have otherwise agreed. In this case, the complainant PW-1 being a tribal woman was going for coolie work to the field of the accused who belonged to Reddy caste. Certainly he was in a position to dominate the will of the woman. He also used his position to exploit her sexually assuring her that he would marry etc. All the requirements of the section are made out in this case. The lower Court was right in finding the accused guilty for the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(xii) of the Central Act 33/89.
8. In this case the accused wanted to marry PW-1. He lived with her for 5 months in her hut. He begot a female child also through PW-1. However, the marriage could not take place due to the interference by the brothers of the accused. Considering these aspects I feel that the sentence passed in this case is somewhat severe. Therefore, I reduce the sentence to 6 months rigorous imprisonment. The fine imposed is maintained.
9. With this modification the Criminal Appeal is allowed partly.
10. Appeal partly allowed.