JUDGMENT :

NAVNEET KUMAR, J.

1. This appeal is preferred against the Judgment of Conviction dated 28.04.2006 and order of sentence dated 29.04.2006 passed by the learned 1st Additional District and Sessions Judge, Latehar whereby the accused appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 384, 353, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years under Section 384 of the Indian Penal code, further imprisonment for two years under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code and further he was directed to undergo imprisonment for two years under Section 504 of the Indian Penal Code and rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 3(i)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and a fine of Rs. 5000/- (Rupees five thousand) and in its default of payment of fine the appellant was further directed to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. It has further been directed that 50 per cent of the fine amount so paid by the accused shall go to the complainant/informant.

2. The prosecution case arose in the wake of written report dated 05.06.2003 of the informant Siddhi Paswan (PW-3), the then Junior Engineer Rural Engineering Committee Chandwa, District, Latehar which is as under:

On 03.06.2003 the accused appellant Pramod Kumar Sahu stepped inside the government quarters of the informant situated in the residential colony at Chandwa and demanded Rs. 20,000/- from him and threatened if his demand were not met with, the informant and his family would be taken to task and ruined. As per the allegations, upon refusal of paying extortion demand, the accused hurled various abuses upon the informant and calling him names and stated “TUM HARIJAN DURJAN KO MAARTE MAARTE YAHAN SE BHAGA DOONGA YADI CHAIN SE REHNA HAI TO RANGDARI TAX MERE YAHAN PAHUNCHA DO.” The informant has further stated that in the past also the accused had misbehaved with him threatening him of dire consequences and resulting in seeping of fear psychosis in the mind of the informant and hence, he was constrained to take the lawful recourse of registering a case under the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid written report instituted by the informant at Ranchi SC/ST Police Station on 07.06.2003 a formal F.I.R. was lodged by SC/ST P.S. Case No. 18 of 2003 dated 07.06.2003 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 198 of 2003 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 384, 353, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and 3(i) (X) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 and the investigation of the case commenced. After the completion of the investigation the charge sheet no. 15 of 2004 dated 28.02.2004 was submitted for the offence punishable under Sections 384, 353, 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(i)(x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989 in the court of C.J.M. Latehar against the accused facing the trial on 04.03.2004 and thereafter the learned C.J.M. Latehar finding the case prima facie true took the cognizance of the aforesaid offences on 09.03.2004 and the case was then made over to the Court of S.D.J.M. Latehar for disposal. Subsequently the case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 06.07.2004. After conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court passed the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence which is under challenge in this appeal.

4. Heard Mr. Jitendra S. Singh and Randhir Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State.

5. Assailing the impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence, the learned defence counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submitted that the learned trial court failed to appreciate the testimony of the witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution in totality and came to a wrong finding inasmuch as vital contradictions in the depositions of the witnesses and