The burden of proof in criminal cases lies with the prosecution, and mere witness testimony is insufficient without clear evidence to support claims.

JUDGMENT :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant- State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dahod (hereinafter referred to as the learned Appellate Court) in Criminal Appeal No. 02 of 2005 on 30.04.2010, whereby, the learned Appellate Court was pleased to acquit the respondents from the offence under Section 143 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE and Sections 3(1)(10) and 3(1)(15) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1889 (hereinafter referred to as the Atrocities Act) and convict the respondents and sentenced them to simple imprisonment of one year each for the offence under Section 504 of INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (hereafter referred to as "IPC" for short) and to simple imprisonment of one year each for the offence under Section 506 (1) of the IPC. Learned trial Court was further pleased to order that both the sentences were to run concurrently and any period of imprisonment undergone as an under trial prisoners to be given as set off.

1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as the accused in the rank and file as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.

2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:-

2.1 The complainant - Navlabhai Maganbhai Harihan had his house on a plot and he wanted to build a pakka house in that plot and had taken down the old house for cooking and due to the immense heat, he had built a tent for shelter and for cooking and on 9-5-2000 while he along with others were at this tent at around 5 p.m., the accused came and abused them and threatened to kill them and broke their tents and hurled caste slurs against them. The complainant filed the complaint being I- C.R.No. 47 of 2000 at Limdi Police Station under Sections 143 , 504 and 506(2) of the IPC and Sections 3(1)(10) 3(1)(15) of the Atrocities Act.

2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a chargesheet came to be filed before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dahod and as the said offences against the accused was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Dahod as per the provisions of Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered Sessions Case No. 05 of 2004 (Old case No. 38 of 2001).

2.3 The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court, and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code and a charge at Exh. 2 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs. 3 and 4, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.4 The prosecution produced fourteen oral evidences and ten documentary evidences to bring home charge against the accused and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing pursis, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. The accused refused to step into the witness box or examine witnesses on their behalf and state that a false case has been filed against them. After the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned trial Court by the impugne