Special Judge (SC&POA), Senapati on Tuesday sentenced Kishorchandra Wangkhem to six-month simple imprisonment with Rs 5,000 fine for intentional insult and intimidation with an intent to humiliate a member of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe under section 3(1)(r) of SC and SC (Prevention of Atrocities), Act, 1989.
However, he was granted bail for 90 days by the High Court in view of petition under SC&ST (PO) Act with section 389 (3) CrPC.
Kishorechandra Wangkhem had file an application for suspension of the sentence to the High Court of Manipur.
The Special Judge (SC&ST (PO), Senapati regarding the application opined that the court has no impediment of passing the order granting him bail as there is no likelihood to abscond in order to evade the compliance of judgement and sentence.
Therefore, the court granted bail for 90 days and directed to report the fate of the appeal within a period of 90 days for further execution of the sentence.
Kishorchandra Wangkhem @ Wangkhemcha Wangthoi, 41, who was earlier detained under the National Security Act in 2018, was arrested yet again for a communally derogatory remark (Haothu Hanubi) against the Maram Tribe on his Facebook post. A complaint was lodged by the Maram Women Union to Senapati police station under section 124A/153A/505 IPC and 3(1)(r) SC and ST POA Act, 1989.
The case was that the act of the convict had intentionally targeted the Maram Tribe to insult and humiliate tribal women in general and Maram women. The charge was slapped against him and framed charges for having committed the offenses punishable 153-A, 505 (c) IPC and section 3(1)(r) of SC&ST, PO Act, 1989.
The court after hearing all prosecution witnesses and defence witnesses dropped section 153-A, 505 and 124 A of IPC which has not established the ingredients of punishment offences requisite to punish, due to lack of evidence.
The court does agree that the prosecution duly collaborated with a section of SC&ST PO Act, 1989. And, the court stated that the prosecution has succeeded to bring home the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.
After considering all facts and circumstances of the case and the family of the convict, the court sentenced him to undergo six months' simple imprisonment.
