ORDER

The petitioners have challenged the judgment of conviction dated 15.03.2017 and consequent order of sentence dated 16.03.2017 passed by the Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Soraba (henceforth referred to as 'Trial Court' for short) in C.C.No.554/2012 convicting them for the offences punishable under Sections 504, 353, 332, 289 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC and sentencing them to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Section 504 read with Section 34 of IPC and simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 353 read with Section 34 of IPC and simple imprisonment for a period of one year along with fine of Rs.1,000/- each, for the offence punishable under Section 332 read with Section 34 of IPC and simple imprisonment for a period of one month for the offence punishable under Section 289 read with Section 34 of IPC and simple imprisonment for a period of three months for the offence punishable under Section 506 read with Section 34 of IPC. The petitioners have also challenged the judgment dated 14.12.2018 passed by the V Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shivamogga sitting at Sagar (henceforth referred to as 'Appellate Court' for short) in Crl.A.No.25/2017 by which, the judgment of conviction passed by the Trial Court was upheld.

2. The parties shall henceforth be referred to as they were arraigned before the Trial Court. The petitioners herein were the accused.

3. The case of the prosecution was that an arrest warrant was issued against accused No.1 by the Civil Judge and JMFC, Soraba in Crl.Misc.107/2008 and that the attempts made by the police to arrest the accused No.1 proved futile. It was claimed that since the accused No.1 could not be traced during the day time, on the instructions of the Sub-Inspector, CW.1, CW.2 along with police constables CW.3, CW.4 and P.C.822 and a woman P.C.1691 went to the house of the accused No.1 in a departmental jeep at 10.15 p.m. on 06.01.2012 and reached the house of accused No.1 at 11. 00 p.m. When the accused No.1 was called out, he came out and started abusing CW.1 and his staff and threatened to kill them, if they touched him. Though CW.1 informed him about the warrant and that he was avoiding arrest, his brother (accused No.2) unleashed a dog domesticated by him, which bit CW.2 on his left thigh. When CW.1 and his staff tried to arrest accused No.1, the accused No.1 slapped CW.2, while accused No.2 struck CW.1 on his head with a stick. As a result, CW.1 fell down. Accused No.1 held the collar of the uniform of CW.1 and pulled him around resulting in two buttons of the shirt coming off. The accused No.2 thereafter, assaulted P.C.1598 on the right arm. The accused Nos.3 and 4 dragged CW.1 around and challenged how they could take accused No.1 and threatened to put the jeep on fire and threatened to kill CW.1 and his staff. It was claimed that CW.1 arrested accused No.1 and since other villagers assembled, the accused Nos.2 to 4 escaped. A complaint was therefore, lodged stating that an arrest warrant was issued against accused No.1 in Crl.Misc.Nos.107/2008 and 177/2011 and when CW.1 and his staff went to arrest accused No.1, he and his family members obstructed the officials from performing their duty and also assaulted them with stick and abused them and also tore off the uniform of CW.1. The accused No.1 was produced before the Sub-Inspector (CW.15). Based on this complaint, the jurisdictional police registered Crime No.10/2012 for the offences punishable under Sections

353, 332, 504, 506, 289 read with Section 34 of IPC.

4. CW.15 registered an F.I.R. and placed the file and produced the accused No.1 before CW.16 - investigating officer, who seized the torn uniform of CW.1, conducted a spot mahazar and seized the stick used for the crime, prepared a sketch of the spot and collected the tax demand extract of the house of the accused. He also secured the wound certificates of the injured