1. By this appeal, the appellant / original accused is challenging the judgment and order dated 15th January 2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Special Case No. 8 of 1998 thereby convicting the appellant / accused of the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, and sentencing her to suffer simple imprisonment for 6 months apart from payment of fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo further simple imprisonment for fifteen days. The appellant / accused was, however, acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 504 of the IPC.

2. Heard Ms. Pracheta Rathod, the learned advocate appearing for the appellant / accused. She argued that evidence of prosecution witnesses is totally inconsistent and they are disclosing different places of incident. Though Informant PW1 Mahadeo Gaikwad has stated that the incident took place at the door of the Accounts Branch of the office, other witness - PW2 Manohar Gaikwad examined by the prosecution is stating that the incident took place at the platform of the verandah of the office. The learned advocate for the appellant / accuse