JUDGMENT

Dharmadhikari, J.-Leave granted in all the above cases.

Heard counsel for the parties.

2. The State and the complainant seek setting aside of the order dated 7.8.2003 of the High Court of Bombay reversing the judgment of conviction of the trial court and the appellate court passed against the respondent-accused for alleged offence under Section 324 and 452 read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to one month simple imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default simple imprisonment for seven days.

3. The facts leading to prosecution of the accused and their conviction and eventual acquittal by the High Court are as follows:-

Complainant Smt. Satish Kaur Sahni and the convicted accused reside in different flats in the same building in Bombay.

4. It is alleged that on 3.5.1990 there was a quarrel between complainant and the accused on cleaning of drainage. On the same day, i.e., 3.5.1990 at about 8.30 in the night when the complainant was in her house with her son Manpreet Sahni (PW-3), all five accused are alleged to have entered the house of the complainant with stick, aluminum rod and tape-recorder cassettes. They started beating the complainant with fists an