N. ANANDA, J.—This appeal is filed under Section 378(1)(3) Cr.P.C. by the State represented by Kengeri Gate Police Station, Bangalore City against the judgment dated 30.6.2006 in S.C. No. 88/2004 on the file of the II Additional City Sessions and Special Judge Bangalore, where by the accused were acquitted for the offences under Sections 328 and 307 read with 34 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act.

2. The brief facts leading to filing of this appeal are as follows:

The complainant, Doddaiah and his wife Nagarathnainma belongs to Adi Karnataka Caste Accused 1 and 2 belong to Okkaliga community. On 7.1.2008 at about 8.30 p.m., the accused with a common intention picked up quarrel and assaulted P.W. 2, Nagarathnamma. In the meanwhile, P.W. 1, Doddaiah went there to rescue P.W. 2. The accused 1 to 3 with a common intention to take away the life of P.W. 1 and P.W. 2, attacked them with deadly weapons and also abused them in filthy language knowing fully well that they belong to Adi Karnataka Caste and thereby insulted them.

On the basis of the complaint given by P.W. 1 (Doddaiah), the S.H.O. Jnanabharathi Police registered a case in Crime No. 8/2003 for the offences punishable under Sections 328, 307 and 506 read with 34 IPC and also under Section 3(i)(x)(xi) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act.), 1989. The Investigating Officer visited the scene of offence and seized the weapons M.Os. 3 and 4 said to have been used for the commission of offence. They sent the injured persons to the Government Hospital for treatment.

P.W. 6, Dr. Girija, the Medical Officer, who treated the injured persons, issued wound certificates Exs. P9 and P10 stating that P.Ws. 1 and 2 suffered simple injuries. Alter completion of investigation, Inspector of Police filed a charge sheet. After hearing the learned SPP and learned Counsel for accused, the learned trial Judge framed charges against accused for offences punishable under Sections 328 and 307 read with 34 IPC and Section 3(i)(x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act.).

3. The plea of accused is one of total denial.

4. To bring home, the guilt of accused for the aforestated offences, the prosecution examined P.Ws. 1 to 12 and got marked Exs. P1 to P18 and material objects as per M.Os. 1 to 4.

5. Considering the oral and documentary evidence, the learned trial Judge found the accused not guilty of offences for which they are charged.

6. Aggrieved by the order of acquittal, the State has filed this appeal.

7. We have heard Sri P.M. Nawaz, learned Additional State Public Prosecutor and Sri N. Mahalinga. Bhat and Sri M. Girish learned Counsel for accused. We have been taken through the evidence of prosecution witnesses and the impugned judgment.

8. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that accused No. 1 died during the pendency of trial and, therefore, the case against accused No. 1 abates.

9. The learned Counsel for accused 2 and 3 submitted that there are no independent eye witnesses to the incident. The only independent eye witness, P.W. 3, did not support the case of the prosecution. The evidence of P.Ws. 1 and 2 is not consistent and corroborative in all material particulars. Therefore, the learned trial Judge has rightly recorded the acquittal of accused for the offences for which they are charged.

10. The learned. Public Prosecutor submitted that accused caused injuries to P.Ws. 1 and 2, abused them taking out the name of their caste, as they belong to weaker sections of society, therefore, the accused are liable for punishment.

11. According to the prosecution, on 7.1.2003, at about 8.30 p.m., accused 1 to 3 picked up quarrel with P.W. 2 in front, of her house and abused her taking out the name of her caste as ‘Madiga’ and assaulted her. When P.W. 1 intervened, he was also assaulted and he was also abused by the accused as ‘Holeya Madiga’.

12. In the evidence, P.W. 1 has stated that on 7.1.2003, he saw accused 1 and 3 quarreling with his wile (P.W. 2). When he interven