A special Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes court in Ghaziabad on Monday sentenced two brothers from Baghpat to life imprisonment for the murder of a neighbor a decade ago, triggered by a delay in repaying a loan of Rs 3,000.
Incident and Complaint
In July 2016, Narendra Kumar lodged a complaint at the Sihanigate police station, accusing three individuals—brothers Umesh Sharma and Ankur Sharma, along with a teenage boy—of attacking him and his brother with iron rods and broken beer bottles. According to Kumar, he had borrowed Rs 3,000 from Umesh a few months prior. On the day of the incident, he and his younger brother Rajkumar approached the accused to request additional time for repayment. The accused, allegedly intoxicated, reacted violently upon hearing the request, assaulting the brothers. While Narendra escaped with injuries, Rajkumar sustained fatal wounds and later died at a hospital.
Legal Proceedings
The police referred the minor accused to the juvenile justice board and initiated proceedings against the brothers. They were charged under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, which prescribes punishment for severe crimes against SC/ST individuals. Additionally, they were booked under Section 201 (destruction of evidence) of the IPC for attempting to conceal weapons and wash blood from their clothes.
During the trial, Judge Jeetendra Mishra acquitted the brothers of charges under the SC/ST Act but found them guilty of murder and destruction of evidence. The court imposed a fine of Rs 11,000 on each accused. Both sentences are to run concurrently, with credit given for time already spent in custody.
Court's Observations
The judge noted, "The evidence of medical witnesses has corroborated the prosecution's story. The iron rod and beer bottle used in the incident have been recovered. The plaintiff gave a clear, natural, and consistent account of the incident. The version presented by the accused witnesses was found to be unacceptable." However, the court observed that the investigating officer failed to clarify whether the murder was committed with knowledge of the victim's caste. The judge stated, "Under these circumstances, the premise that the accused had personal knowledge of the plaintiff or his family under Section 8(C) of the SC/ST Act is not sufficient to establish that the accused committed the crime based on knowledge that the deceased belonged to a Scheduled Caste." Consequently, the duo was acquitted of the atrocity charges.
This verdict underscores the judicial system's commitment to addressing violent crimes while carefully evaluating the applicability of specific legal provisions. The life sentence serves as a strong deterrent against such acts, reflecting the severity of taking a life over a trivial financial dispute.
