B.V. Pinto, J.— This appeal is filed by the State challenging the judgment dated 11.08.2003, passed by the Addl. Civil Judge and JMFC, Chintamani in C.C. No. 444/2002 acquitting the Respondents of the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 427, 435, 504, 506 read with 149 IPC.

2. Parties are referred according to their rank in the trial Court.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.09.2002 at about 12 in the mid night, the accused formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, the common object of which was to hurt CW. 1 and to force him to leave the village, there by, they are alleged to have committed an offence punishable under Section 143 IPC. It is further alleged that on the said date, place and time, the accused committed rioting in the front of the house of CW. 1 M. Reddappa of Gopasandra village. Chintamani taluk, holding lethal weapons like stones, clubs and iron rods and trespassed into the house of CW. 1 Redappa and picked up quarrel with him and caused mischief and by destroying the house hold articles and utensils of cooking and caused loss of Rs. 1,00,000/- by setting fire to the Chappara in front of the house which was used for rearing the silk cocoons, thereby, they are alleged to have committed offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 448, 427, 435 read with 149 IPC. It is further alleged that on the said place, date and time, the accused intentionally insulted CW 1 Redappa and thereby, caused an offence by breaking public peace, thereby, they are alleged to have committed offence punishable under Section 504 read with 149 IPC. It is further alleged that on the said date, place and time, the accused have criminally intimidated CWs. 1 to 4 thereby, they are alleged to have committed offence punishable under Section 506 read with 149 IPC.

4. The prosecution in order to prove the case has examined in all 11 witnesses, PWs. 1 to 11 and got marked documents Exs. P.1 to P.5 and produced MOs. 1 to 3.

5. The defence of the accused was one of foe total denial, however, they have got marked Ex. D.1 being the portion of the statement of PW.2.

6. However, after hearing the prosecution and the defence, the learned Magistrate was pleased to hold that the prosecution has not proved the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt and hence, the accused are acquitted of the offences charged against them. Being aggrieved by the judgment of acquittal, the State has filed this appeal.

7. Heard Sri Vijaya Kumar Majage, learned HCGP for the Appellant State and Sri M.R. Nanjunda Gowda, learned Counsel for the Respondents accused.

8. Sri Vijaya Kumar Majage, learned HCGP submits that the prosecution has in clear terms proved before the Court that the accused have formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and have caused damage to the house property of PW.1 Redappa. He has submitted that the evidence of PWs.1 and 2 and 8 who is the son of PW.1 clearly establishes that the accused have caused damage to the pendal of PW.1, which was used for rearing the silk cocoons. He further submits that fire brigade had come in the night and extinguished the fire which fact has been spoken by PW.7. He submits that PW.1 before the Court has stated that he has suffered loss of Rs. 60,000/-, whereas, the mahazar Ex.P.2 indicates that the complainant has suffered a loss of Rs. 1,00,000/- by the acts of the accused. He further submits that accused have caused mischief by setting fire and the only reason for such act is that PW. 1 and his family has come from some other village and has purchased property and he has settled in the place of the incident. He submits that in the cross-examination, PWs.1, 2 and 8 do not indicate any enemity on the part of the complainant nor any motive for falsely implicating the accused. He also submits that there is no reason as to why PWs.1 and 2, 8 and 10 should have falsely implicated the accused and prays that the order of acquittal is bad in law and therefore, submits that the accus