JUDGMENT :

This Criminal Appeal has been filed against the judgment of conviction and sentence, dated 28.8.2019, passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Krishnagiri, in Sessions Case No.73 of 2018.

2. The respondent police registered a case in Crime No.144/2016 against the appellants for the offences punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act) and Section 506(1) of IPC. After completing the investigation, laid a charge-sheet before the District Munsif cum Judicial Magistrate Court, Denkanikottai, who has taken the case in P.R.C.No.17/2016. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Principal Sessions Court, Krishnagiri, who has taken the case on file in S.C.No.73/2018.

3. After completing the formalities, the learned Principal Sessions Judge framed charges against the 1st accused u/s.354 IPC, Section 3(1)(r) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 2015, u/s.506(i) IPC and u/s.3(2)(va) of SC/ST (POA) amendment Ordinance Act, 2015 and against the 2nd accused u/s.3(1)(r) and (s) of SC/ST (POA) Amendment Ordinance Act, 2015.

4. After trial, the learned Principal Sessions Judge convicted the 1st appellant/1st accused (i) for offence u/s.354 IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-; (ii) for offence u/s.506(i) of IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-; (iii) for offence u/s.3(1)(r) and (S) of SC/ST Act, sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- (total Rs.4000/-); for the offence u/s.3(2)(Va) of SC/ST Act, sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-. The 2nd appellant/2nd accused was convicted for the offence u/s.3(1)(r) and (S) of SC/ST Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each and to pay fine of Rs.2000/- each (Rs.4000/-).

5. The case of the prosecution is that on the day of occurrence, when P.W.1 victim went through the Soodappa Land Mettu Kollai to attend nature’s call at about 6 O’ clock in the morning, the 1st appellant/1staccused went back by her side, hugged and dragged her. Since she raised voice, P.W.2 also shouted as to who is that. 1st accused shouted the victim and fled away from that place. P.W.1 informed about the occurrence to P.W.3 her uncle. P.W.3 stated not to inform the incident to her husband and he will look into the matter. Then P.W.3 went to the house of the 1stappellant/1staccused, but the 1st accused did not give respect to his words, so he approached A-2 brother of A-1. P.W.3 informed about the incident. A-2 told his brother is not a person like that and scolded P.W.3 in filthy language and humiliated him, knowing fully well that he belongs to Scheduled Caste community. Since the accused persons not properly responded, P.W.3 approached the police. Since it was during election time, they lodged the complaint after one week. The respondent police initially registered the complaint u/s.3(1)(x) of SC/ST act and u/s.506(i) of IPC. After investigation, respondent police filed charge sheet. Since the offence falls under the provisions of SC/ST Act, case has been committed to the Designated Court. The learned Principal Sessions Judge/Designated Court, framed charges against the accused 1 and 2 as stated above. The appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. In order to prove the case, on the side of the prosecution, as many as 9 Witnesses viz., P.W.1 to P.W.9 were examined and 12 Exhibits viz., P.1 to P.12 were marked.

7. After completing the prosecution evidence, incriminating circumstances culled out from the prosecution witnesses were put before the appellants and questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and they denied the same as false and pleaded not guilty. On the side of defence, D.W.1 and D.W.2 were examined and no document has been marked on the side of defence. After trial, the Designated court, passed the judgment of conviction and sente