1. This is an appeal preferred by the four accused persons who are convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, in Sessions Case No. 222 of 1994, decided on 05.02.1998, whereby the Sessions Judge convicted the appellants of offences punishable under sections 452, 354, 323, 506 (2) all read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short “I.P.C.”) and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 100/for offences punishable under sections 452 & 506 (2) both r/w 34 of the I.P.C. Each of the appellant is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 100/for offence punishable under section 354 r/w 34 of the I.P.C. For offence punishable under section 323 r/w 34 of the I.P.C. each of the appellant is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay fine of Rs. 100/. The accused/appellants are also convicted of offence punishable under sections 3 (1) (iii) (xi) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “Atrocities Act”) and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 100/.

2. Brief facts giving rise to this appeal may be stated as below:

P.W.4victim was from “Hindu (Bhil)” community, resident of village Chichondi, Tal. & Dist. Ahmednagar. She was residing with her father, handicapped brother and lunatic sister. P.W.4victim was about 25 years of age, when the incident took place on 13.05.1994. She had illicit relations with P.W.9Vikram. From P.W.9Vikram, P.W.4victim had given birth to a daughter and was also pregnant for second time. The marriage of P.W.9Vikram was being arranged and members of his family were against the relationship between P.W.4victim and P.W.9Vikram. On 13.05.1994 at about 5.00 p.m. when P.W.4victim was at her house, at that time the four appellants went to her house and asked why she kept illicit relations with P.W.9Vikram and started beating her with hands and kicks. At that time appellant Nos. 1 and 4 held her hands. Appellant No.3Subabai removed her Saree. Appellant No.2Subhash removed knot of Peticot of the victim and thereafter appellant No.3Subabai torn her blowse and brassiere and made P.W.4victim naked. Thereafter, appellant Nos.3Subabai and appellant No.4Balu paraded P.W.4victim in naked condition on the road of the village. At that time all four appellant were beating and abusing P.W.4victim. They brought P.W.4victim before the shop of Sarpanch P.W.3Shankar Pawar. At that time one Thombare was also present there. P.W.4victim was abused filthily by the appellants. At that time P.W.9Vikram came there. He was having a lungi, which he threw on the person of P.W.4victim and thereafter the appellants went away. Thereafter, P.W.9Vikram brought Saree, blowse, peticot and gave it to P.W.4victim, who wore them on the road itself. At about 8.40 p.m. the complaint was given at Taluka Police Station, Nagar. After this complaint was recorded P.S.I. Ugale took over investigation. Place of offence shown to him by P.W.4victim. Panchanama was drawn. After lodging the complaint, P.W.4victim had been sent to Medical Officer and P.W.8Dr. Ashok Ingale examined P.W.4Victim. He issued Medical Certificate. After recording statements of various witnesses, charge sheet was sent.

3. In all 10 witnesses were examined and on the basis of said evidence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, passed the order of conviction and sentence. It is this order, which is challenged in this appeal.

4. In this case, the conviction under Atrocities Act is challenged on various grounds. Firstly, Adv. Shri Tamke for the appellants argued that in this case the investigation is carried out by the P.S.I., which ought to have been carried out by a person of the rank of Dy. Superintendent of Police or above. I may refer to Rule 7 of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Rules, 1995, which lays down that when offence is comm