Credible testimonies of public servants can sustain a conviction even without independent witnesses; mitigating circumstances may justify a reduction in sentence.

JUDGMENT :

The appellants, who are Accused Nos.1 to 3 in S.C.No.101 of 2019 on the file of the learned 4^th Additional Sessions Court, Tirunelveli, filed this criminal appeal challenging the conviction and sentence imposed against them by the learned 4^th Additional Sessions Court, Tirunelveli. The learned trial Judge has passed the impugned order, dated 07.09.2019 and found the appellants guilty, convicted and sentenced them as detailed below:

2. The brief facts of the case:

P.W.1 and P.W.2 were the conductor and driver. On 30.08.2018 at about 22.45 hours, P.W.2 drove the bus bearing Registration No.TN 01 AN 1118, and they were heading to Ooty, from Nagercoil, when the bus departed from Tirunelveli New bus stand, to take a passengers to Ooty in a government bus, the appellants came to board the bus to Otanchatram and at that time, P.W.1 stated that already the seats had been occupied and asked them to get down. Due to which, there was a wordy altercation between them. On the same day at 23.15 hours, due to the said enmity when the Government bus bearing Registration No.TN 01 AN 1118, came near Vethividyasaram, Tatchanallur Madurai Road, at moderate speed, the appellants came in a two wheeler Honda Shine bearing Registration No.TN 72 AS 8136, and stopped the bus and abused the driver and conductor in a filthy language and also prevented them from discharging their duty and caused damage to the front windscreen of the bus, by using a stone and caused damage, worth about Rs.6,500/- and criminally intimidated them. Hence, the respondent registered a case in Crime No.171 of 2018, for the offence punishable under Sections 341, 294(b), 353 and 506(ii) of IPC and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act, 1992. After completion of investigation, the respondent police filed the final report. The same was taken on the file in P.R.C.No.27 of 2018, by the learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tirunelveli.

3.On appearance of the appellants, copies of documents relied by the prosecution were furnished to the accused under section 207 of Cr.P.C. The learned Judicial Magistrate No.IV, Tirunelveli, found that the offence under Sections 341, 294(b), 353 and 506(ii) of IPC and Section 3 of TNPPDL Act, 1992 are triable only by the Sessions Court and committed the case under Section 209 Cr.P.C., to the learned IV Additional Sessions Court, Tirunelveli. Thereafter, the case was taken on file in S.C.No.101 of 2019. Then, framed necessary charges were framed and the accused were questioned. The accused denied the charges and pleaded not guilty and stood for trial.

4.To prove the case, the prosecution examined P.W.1 to P.W.14 and exhibited 8 documents as Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.8 and produced 2 material objects as M.O.1 and M.O.2. Thereafter, the appellants were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C proceedings after disclosing the incriminating evidence against them and they denied the same as false and thereafter, the case was posted for defence evidence. The accused neither produced any documents nor examined any witnesses on their side.

5.The learned trial Judge, on considering the evidence of witnesses and documents, convicted and sentenced the appellants for the offence as stated supra. Aggrieved over the same, the appellants preferred this appeal.

6.The submission of the learned counsel appearing for the appellants:

6.1. The prosecution failed to examine the any of the passenger of the bus and they examined only driver and conductor of the bus and conviction and sentence passed only on