Ahmedabad: The Gujarat High Court has upheld the acquittal of three persons accused of caste-based abuse and attempted assault on a school principal in Banaskantha district in 2010, observing that not every insult or humiliation amounts to an offence under the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Justice S V Pinto dismissed the Gujarat government’s appeal against a trial court’s September 2012 order acquitting the accused, citing insufficient evidence to establish the specific caste-related remarks allegedly made against the complainant and the intention to humiliate him on account of his caste.
The case originated from a dispute at Godhani Primary School on September 16, 2010, when school principal B M Ninama was making arrangements for students to have their mid-day meal. According to the prosecution, Abhesinh Vaghela, the manager of the Mid-Day Meal Scheme, questioned the principal for not allowing children to sit for lunch.
Following an exchange, Vaghela allegedly abused Ninama and made derogatory caste-related remarks. He subsequently returned to the school carrying a bottle of medicine and threatened to consume it, allegedly telling the principal that he would then have to look after his wife and children.
Vaghela’s wife and sister-in-law also allegedly reached the school, asked the principal to consume the medicine himself and attempted to assault him. Other school staff members intervened and separated the parties.
However, the High Court found significant inconsistencies in the prosecution’s evidence. It noted that some witnesses had been standing at a distance and could not hear the conversation between the principal and Vaghela. Another witness also failed to recall the exact words allegedly used during the altercation.
The court observed that the testimonies of the school staff did not satisfactorily corroborate the material allegations made by the complainant.
Questioning the investigation, the High Court further noted that police had failed to recover the bottle of medicine allegedly brought by Vaghela. The investigating officer had admitted that no such bottle was recovered, while no independent evidence established that the accused had returned to the school with it.
Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the court reiterated that an insult or intimidation would not attract Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act unless it was directed at a person specifically because of their membership of a Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe.
It held that the prosecution had failed to establish the precise expressions allegedly used, their context and the intention to humiliate the principal on account of his caste.
The court also found insufficient evidence to establish the specific involvement of Vaghela’s wife and sister-in-law in the alleged assault. Their mere presence at the school was not enough to establish criminal liability.
Further, the prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients of Section 332 of the Indian Penal Code, including that the complainant qualified as a public servant under the law and that hurt was voluntarily caused to deter him from performing his official duties.
Observing that material omissions, improvements in witness statements and the absence of independent corroboration created reasonable doubt, the High Court said suspicion, however strong, could not replace proof.
The court accordingly confirmed the acquittal of all three accused and dismissed the state government’s appeal.
