G.B. Shah, J.

1. Present appeal, under Section 374 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (for brevity, 'the Code'), filed by the appellants - original accused, is directed against the judgment and order dated 24/02/1998, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Panchmahals @ Godhra in Sessions Case No. 109 of 1994 (Atrocity), whereby, they came to be convicted for the offences punishable under Section 333 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity, 'the IPC') and Section 26(d) of the Indian Forests Act, 1921 (for brevity, 'the Forests Act) and for the offence punishable under Section 333 of the IPC, the accused No. 1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four years and a fine of Rs. 3,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo, further rigorous imprisonment for six months, whereas, the accused Nos. 2 and 3 were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 1/2 years and fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for four months and for the offence punishable under Section 26(d)of the Forests Act, they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs. 500/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo, further rigorous imprisonment for fifteen days. Both the sentences were to run concurrently. For the sake of convenience, the parties are, hereinafter, referred to as per their original status.

2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 22/09/1994 at about 10:00 p.m. in the sim of villages: Daruniya and Samlina, in the reserved forest area, the accused allegedly have been grazing their buffaloes, about 40 in number, and with a view to interrupt and restrain the complainant and others from performing their duties, they, in the aid and abetment of each other, caused grievous injuries to the complainant with stick blows on different parts of the body and also abused the complainant and others. They also threatened them to death. Moreover, the accused allegedly abused the complainant of his caste knowing fully well that the complainant was belonging to the reserved caste. Thus, the accused committed the offence alleged against them, for which a complaint for the offences punishable under Sections 333, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the IPC, Section 26(d) of the Forests Act and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 came to be lodged against them.

2.1 Pursuant to the complaint, investigation was carried out. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed and as the case was triable by the Court of Sessions, it was committed to the Sessions Court. The trial Court framed charge against the accused. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. Therefore, the prosecution produced oral as well as documentary evidence. In order to bring home the charge against the accused, the prosecution has examined as many as 10 witnesses and also produced several documentary evidence.

2.2 At the end of the trial, Further Statements of the accused under Section 313 of Code were recorded in which, they pleaded not guilty and false implication. Thus, after recording above-referred Further Statements and hearing the arguments on behalf of prosecution and the defence, the learned Sessions Judge convicted the accused, as aforesaid, by impugned judgment and order giving rise to prefer the present appeal.

3. Heard Mr. Nilesh I. Jani, the learned advocate for the appellants - accused and Ms. Reeta Chandarana, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

4. Following order was passed by this Court on 04/03/1998, while admitting the present appeal:

"Admit.

Appellants No. 2 and 3 Bhavanbhai Nagjibhai Bharwad and Haribhai @ Haria Kamu respectively shall be released on the same bail and fresh bond. With regard appellant No. 1 Bhemabhai Bholabhai Bharwad question of bail will be considered on returnable date. Notice with regard to that prayer, return