Pandalai, J.

1. The petitioners who are six in number were convicted and sentenced as follows : Petitioners 1 to 4 (accused 1 to 4) under Section 430, petitioners 5 and 6 (accused 7 and 8) under Section 430 read with Section 34; petitioners 2 and 3 (accused 2 and 3) also under Section 352. Petitioners 2 and 3 (accused 2 and 3) were fined Rs. 60 and all the others Rs. 50 each.

2. The conviction arose out of the act of the ryots of Theniluppai village, to which the petitioners belong, opening the sluice of the feeder channel from the Cheyyar anicut and also in removing a mud dam which had been temporarily put up across a vellavari also taking off water from the same anicut, but from the opposite bank. The object of the villagers was to take water to their own village tank fed by this sluice and by the vellavari, and these acts were done against the orders of the Public Works Department which has the duty of regulating the distribution of water of this irrigation system, in exercise of which duty the Sub-divisional Engineer had ordered that the sluice to the Theniluppai village should be closed so that the water may flow down to two other village tanks, i. e., Nemili and Venkodu lo