A conviction based on inconsistent and unsupported witness testimony is unsustainable; proper evaluation of evidence, particularly corroborative evidence, is essential to uphold legal standards in刑事法.

ORDER :

(G. BASAVARAJA, J.)

Revision Petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 have preferred this revision petition against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the II Addl. Civil Judge and CJM, Chikkamagaluru in C.C.No.1450/2014 dated 07.01.2017 (hereinafter referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) which is confirmed by the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Chikkamagaluru in Crl.A.No.22/2017 dated 23.03.2018 (hereinafter referred to as 'Appellate Court' for short).

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties in this revision petition are referred to as per their status and rank before the Trial Court.

3. The brief facts leading to this Revision Petition is that the Circle Inspector of Police, Chikkamagaluru submitted the charge sheet for the offence punishable under Sections 353 , 114 and 283 read with 34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE . It is alleged by the prosecution that on 05.04.2014 at about 5.30 p.m., as per the orders of the Superintendent of Police, Chikkamagaluru, CW.1 along with his staff was checking the vehicles passing towards Golf Club cross road. At that time, accused No.1 was driving the pick up vehicle bearing No.KA-31-3430 in a rash and negligent manner and when the said vehicle was intercepted, it was found that he was carrying passengers in the said vehicle and accused No.1 picked up quarrel with CW.1 and his staff and also instigated the moving vehicles on the road to set up an agitation against them and restrained CW.1 and his staff from discharging their duty as a public servant/s. Thus, accused have committed offence under Sections 353 , 114 , 283 read with Section 34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE .

4. After investigation, the investigating officer submitted the charge sheet under Section 353 , 114 , 283 read with Section 34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE and the case was registered against this accused in C.C.No.1450/2014 and summons was issued to him. In pursuance of summons, the accused appeared before the Trial Court and enlarged on bail. The substance of plea is recorded and read over and explained to the accused. Having understood the same, the accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. To prove the case of prosecution, in all, 12 witnesses were examined as PWs.1 to 12 and 9 documents were marked as Exs.P1 to P9. On closure of prosecution side evidence, statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded, but the accused have totally denied the evidence of prosecution witnesses and they have not chosen to lead any defence evidence on their behalf.

6. Having heard on both sides, the Trial Court has acquitted the accused Nos.3 and 4 for the offence under Sections 353 , 114, and 283 read with Section 34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE and convicted accused Nos.1 and 2 for the alleged offences and passed orders on sentence against accused Nos.1 and 2 for the offence punishable under Section 353 of INDIAN PENAL CODE and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three years with a fine of Rs.5,000/- each. Further, accused Nos.1 and 2 are convicted under Section 283 of INDIAN PENAL CODE with a fine of Rs.200/- each. Being aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 preferred appeal before the II Addl. Sessions Judge, Chikkamagalur in Crl.A.No.22/2017, which came to be dismissed on 23.03.2018. Being aggrieved by the judgment of conviction passed by both the Courts, the revision petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 have preferred this present revision petition.

7. Learned counsel for the revision petitioners/accused Nos.1 and 2 would submit that the judgment of conviction and order on sentence passed by the Trial Court which is confirmed by