Emperor Vs. Rustam and Randhir Singh

.....of atrocities - complaint under held, merely because the caste of the accused is not mentioned in the fir stating whether he belongs to scheduled caste or scheduled tribe, it cannot be a ground for quashing the complaint. after ascertaining the facts during he course of investigation it is always open to the investigating officer to record tht the accused either belongs to or does not belongs to schedule caste or scheduled tribe. after final opinion is formed, it is open to the court to either accept the same or take cognizance. even if the charge sheet is filed at the time of consideration of the charge, it si open to the accused to bring to the notice of the court that the materials do not show that the accused does not belong to scheduled caste or scheduled tribe. even if charge is framed at the time of trial materials can be placed to show that the accused either belongs to or does not belong to scheduled caste or scheduled tribe. even if charge is frame d at the time of trial materials can be placed to show that the accused either belongs to or does not belong to scheduled caste or scheduled tribe. it is not a requirement und4r section 3 of the atrocities act that the complainant should disclose the caste of the accused in the complaint. in other words, if there is no mention of the caste of the accused in the fir, that cannot be a ground for either not registering the offence under section 3 of the act or for quashing such complaint - dunne, i should like to say this, if the president does not object to ray saying it. i have now, since i have been here a good long time, sat in a great many of these cases, and, i may be wrong, but i do not remember any attempt so glaringly made, as in these two cases of yours, to bring up a question of mere evidence. but i do think that it ought to be very clearly understood in india that there is not a chance of our turning ourselves into a mere court of criminal appeal, and we could not take up these two cases which..........was given to the clients in india that it was perfectly hopeless to apply here, and in spite of that, my lords, the instructions came back to put the matter before your lordships. what is one to do in the face of thatviscount haldane, j.3. we are dealing with the east. it is very desirable that what lord dunedin has said should be well understood all over india. as for preventing people from appealing to the king-emperor, we are dealing with the east, and they have a constitutional right to present their petitions for leave to appeal and get us to dispose of them; but it is an idle form when it is a question of evidence. the sooner they understand, the better.4. mr. dunne. i do not know if the matter can be reported, or whether your lordships can send a communication to the courts in india; but i am afraid, however much it is done, the last straw they will attempt to clutch at, and we are so far away that no personal influence of anybody a ivising them can be brought to bear upon them.viscount haldane, j.5. we are dealing with the east. the fact that they have a constitutional right of appeal to the king-emperor is enough for them, without going into the merits.