JUDGMENT :

SANDEEP SHARMA, J.

1. Instant appeal filed under S.374 CrPC, lays challenge to judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 2.3.2019, passed by learned Special Judge, Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh in Cr. Case No. 2 of 2016, whereby, learned Court below, while holding the appellants-accused (hereinafter, ‘accused’) guilty of having committed offences punishable under Ss. 447 and 34 IPC and S.3(1)(g) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter, ‘Act’), convicted and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 /- each under Section 447 of IPC and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for seven days. Besides this, accused have been convicted and sentenced to under go simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each for commission of offence punishable under S.3(1)(g) of the Act and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month.

2. Facts, borne out from the record reveal that FIR No. 138 dated 19.8.2015 (Ext. PW-8/A) came to be lodged against the accused under Ss. 447 and 34 IPC and S. 3(1)(v) of the Act at Police Station Amb, District Una, Himachal Pradesh on the allegations that the land belonging to complainant Vinod Kumar, who is a member of the Scheduled Caste, measuring 0- 01-53 Hectares comprising of Khasra No. 1509/775 (Khewat No. 192/181), situate in Village Harwal, Tehsil Amb, District Una, Himachal Pradesh has been wrongfully grabbed by the accused. Complainant named herein above alleged that he belongs to a Scheduled Caste and the accused persons, being upper class, have unauthorizedly occupied his land, as such appropriate action in accordance with law be taken against them. After completion of investigation, police presented Challan in the competent Court of law. Learned Court below, on being satisfied that a prima facie case exists against the accused, framed charges against them for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 447 and 34 IPC and S. 3(1)(g) of the Act and subsequently, on the basis of the evidence collected on record by the prosecution, held the accused guilty of having committed offences punishable under the aforesaid provisions of law vide impugned judgment of conviction and sentenced them, as per description given above.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Court below, accused have approached this Court in the instant proceedings seeking their acquittal after setting aside the judgment of conviction recorded by learned Court below.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the evidence collected on record by the prosecution, this court finds that since the year 2004 accused were in illegal possession of the land owned by the complainant, Vinod Kumar but the FIR which ultimately culminated into Challan under S.173 CrPC, was filed approximately after 11 years of the alleged wrongful dispossession of the complainant from the land. Though the material available on record reveals that prior to filing of FIR in question, complainant had been raising issue with regard to his forcible dispossession from the land in question before other statutory authorities prescribed for redressal of grievances of persons belonging to Scheduled Caste category but till the date of filing of FIR, Ext. PW-8/A, no legal proceedings ever came to be instituted at the behest of the complainant seeking possession of his property/land, unauthorizedly occupied by the accused. Similarly, this court finds from the evidence collected on record by the prosecution that though by leading cogent and convincing evidence on record, prosecution has successfully proved on record that the land in question belongs to the complainant, Vinod Kumar and same is in unauthorized possession of the accused, but there is no evidence worth creden