JUDGMENT

Ram Prasanna Sharma, J. - This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 17.07.2001, passed by Special Judge Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act,1989, Bilaspur (C.G.), in Special Criminal Case No. 17/2000, wherein the said Court convicted appellants No. 1 to 4 for charge under Sections 225/34, 186/34, 294 & 506 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo S.I. for 2 years each and to pay fine of Rs. 200/- each, S.I. for 9 months each, Fine of Rs. 200/- each, S.I. for 1 year, respectively with default stipulations. Further the said Court convicted appellants No. 5 and 6 for charge under Section 332 and 332/34 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo, S.I. for 2 years each, and fine of Rs. 200/- each, respectively with default stipulations.

2. As per prosecution case, there was traffic jam in the fair at Baradwar on 12th December of 1999. In that fair one bus came from Korba side and due to the traffic jam it could not pass through the fair. When rush of the fair reduced, driver of the bus tried to get the bus through the fair but due to the wire hanging near a betel shop (Pan Dukan) causing hurdle in the traffic, the bus could not get through. On request, the shopkeeper refused to remove the said wire. At the same time the station House Officer of Police Station Baradwar namely K.S. Dhruv, reached the spot and asked the shop-keeper to remove the wire. At that very time, accused Rishi Rai and Anand Rai also reached to the spot and assaulted the Station House Officer with fist and when the said police officer was taking Anand Rai and Rishi Rai to the Police Station, rest of the accused persons came there, abused the station House Officer K.S. Dhruv and took the accused Anand Rai and Rishi Rai from the custody of the Station House Officer. Matter was reported and charge-sheeted and convicted them as mentioned above.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits as under:-

(i) No duty certificate is proved in the present case, therefore, it is not proved that victim K.S. Dhruv (PW-6) or any other Public servant was discharging his duties as public servant.

(ii) There is no evidence that any of the public servant has been stopped from discharging his duties, therefore, offence under Section 332 and 332/34 of IPC is not established. Other Charges are not proved by reliable evidence.

4. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that there altercation between driver of bus and owner of the betel shop, in which appellants and the complainant came there and fall in scuffle that is why the police officer intervened and assaulted by the appellants. Eye witnesses as well as other witnesses have established the fact that the complainant police officer K.S. Dhruv(PW-6) was present on the spot in discharging of his official duty and even if the duty certificate has not been collected by the prosecution and same will not sufficient to say case of the prosecution is not proved. From the evidence, charge leveled against appellants is clearly established. Even if the duty certificate was not collected by the prosecution, the other evidence is sufficient to established the guilt of the appellants. The complainant was posted there since June, 1999 and the incident took place on 12.12.1999. Therefore, it may not be said that, local people may not be knowing that, he is a police officer. There is no suggestion by the accused that the complainant was not wearing the police uniform. Looking to the act of the appellants they deserved no mercy and their conviction and sentence should be affirmed.

5. Bus driver Natthu Singh Rathia (PW-2) deposed before the trial Court that he came from Korba and near village Baradwar (Madai Mela) fair was organized and his bus was stuck there, when he was trying to move the bus, it touches the electric wire which was connected to the betel shop. The owner of the betel shop did not remove the wire that is why police officer intervened.

6. As per version of police offic