1. The appellants herein are the accused before the trial court in Special S.C. 27/2010 on the file of the Principal Sessions Court cum Special Court, Coimbatore.

2. The first appellant was tried for offences under sections 3 (1)(x) of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (hereinafter referred to as “SC & ST” Act) and sections 294 (b) and 324 of IPC. The other two appellants were tried for offence under section 342 IPC. The trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused as below:-

(i). A-1 (Balu @ balasubramaniyan):

For offence under section 3 (1)(X) of SC and ST (POA) Act sentenced to undergo 6 months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs 1000/- in default 1 month Simple imprisonment; for offence under section 294(b) of IPC sentenced to undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- in default 3 weeks Simple imprisonment and for offence under section 324 IPC sentenced to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1,000/- in default 3 months Simple imprisonment.

(ii). A-2 (Durai @ Duraisami) and A-3 (Prabu @ Prabukumar) Convicted for offence under section 342 IPC. Sentenced both the accused to undergo 1 year rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs 1000/- in default 3 months Simple imprisonment.

3. The case of the prosecution, is as follows:-

PW-1 belongs to Scheduled Caste community. He was working as site Engineer in Vijayaraj and Company. On 02.01.2010 at about 3.00 pm, when he was taking his food near a stream back of Malumichampatti North Garden, the appellants came there and enquired him. Knowing that he belongs to Scheduled Community, they insulted him calling his community name. A-1 attacked him with cycle tyre on his left shoulder, back and thigh. At that time, A-2 and A-3 caught both the hands of PW-1. The case was registered about this incident, based on the intimation received from the hospital. The complaint given by PW-1 to the respondent police on 03/01/2010 at 15.00 hrs. Thiru. Janaki, Sub-Inspector of Police registered the complaint. The Superintendent of Police, Coimbatore District on considering the fact that the alleged offence attracts the provisions of SC and ST Act, nominated Mr.Muthurasu, the Deputy Superintendent of Police to investigate.

4. To prove the charges, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses (P.Ws.1 to 13). 20 exhibits (Exs.P.1 to P.20) were marked and a cycle tyre piece of 60 cm length was marked as M.O.1.

5. The trial Court accepted the version of the prosecution as spoken by PW-1, the defacto complainant and PW-8 – Senthil, the witness to the occurrence. Relying upon the evidence of the Doctors PW-2 and PW-3, the injuries noted in the accident register were held to be proved as the injuries sustained by PW-1 as deposed by him.

6. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants submitted that, admittedly, the accused and the defacto complainant are strangers to each other. While so, the allegation that the accused knew the community of the defacto complainant (P.W.1) and abused him by filthy language calling his community name is highly unbelievable. The trial court has failed to consider that PW-1 is a wholly unreliable witness and PW-8 presence at the place of alleged occurrence is doubtful.

7. The Doctor - PW-2 who admitted PW-1 on 2/01/2010 at about 7.40 pm has deposed that at the time of admission, PW-1 said he was assaulted by four unknown persons. Whereas, in the complaint given by PW-1 to the Sub-Inspector of police on the next day at about 10.00 hrs, he has stated the name of the first accused and 3 unknown persons.

8. On completion of investigation, the Investigating Officer has laid final report only against three persons. In the cross examination PW-1 admits that only 3 persons assaulted him. The embellishment in the complaint of PW-1, delay in lodging the FIR and lack of corroboration were not at all considered by the court below.

9. The alleged recovery of M.O.1 a piece of cycle tyre not been proved by the prosecution in