COIMBATORE: A Census database is useful not only for statistical purposes but also for winning justice in a court of law as the historic judgment in the Vachathi rioting and mass rape case would prove. Judgment in the case in which 269 forest and police personnel were accused of ravaging the tribal Vachathi village in Dharmapuri district and raping 18 women, besides attacking scores of hapless villagers in June 1992, was delivered last month.Of the surviving accused, more than 50 were also charged under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.Curiously during the trial some of those charged under this Act sought to contest the applicability of the provision arguing that the victims had not produced a community certificate to prove that they belonged to the ST. Counsel for the accused pointed out that the Madras HC had in a case in 2003 held that the burden of proof lay on the authorities when it came to considering the claims of a Scheduled Tribe. However, in his verdict, the Dharmapuri Principal Sessions Judge S Kumaraguru rejected the claim saying that the case law cited by the defence counsel was not relevant in the Vachathi trial. Instead, Kumaraguru relied on a Census data produced by the prosecution as evidence of the tribal nature of the Vachathi village.“In the present case, this court has gone through the case records and found that the population Census officer has issued (a) report, which was marked as Exhibit P-312. The contents of the Exhibit P-312 shows that the people belonging to Vachathi (have been described as belonging to) STs,” he said adding that therefore, the provisions of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was applicable in this instance. “No one found non-scheduled caste (or tribe) people in that village,” he said. Pointing out that numerous accused and witnesses were involved in the case, the judge said “in this circumstance, it is not possible to produce the community certificate of the witnesses as well as accused.” Further, none of the accused had raised any objection that the witnesses do not belong to the ST. “Therefore, the learned counsel for the accused contention is not sustainable one. Not producing the community certificate is not fatal to the prosecution case,” he said while convicting the said accused under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. (With inputs from M Sankararamanujam)
Comments
0 comment