The conviction of the accused was overturned due to insufficient evidence and failure to establish identity beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT

These appeals are at the instance of accused Nos.1 to 6 in SC No.313 of 2003 on the file of Additional Sessions Court Fast Track Court No.III (Ad Hoc), Manjeri, challenging their conviction and sentence under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 353, 332 read with Section 149 of IPC , as per judgment dated 26.12.2007.

2. The prosecution allegation is that, on 18.10.2001 night, accused Nos.1 to 10 encroached into the reserve forest at Chaliyar Mukku, and unauthorisedly cut down a teak tree. PW1 and other forest officials, who were engaged in beat duty, at about 12.45 midnight, heard the sound of a tree falling down, and they proceeded to that place, and then the accused persons, with their common object of doing away with the forest officials, and to deter them from discharging their official duty, formed themselves into an unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons, committed rioting and assaulted PW1 and other forest officials, using dangerous weapons and caused hurt to them. So, they were charged under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 353, 332, 307 read with Section 149 of IPC .

3. On committal of the case by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nilambur, all the accused appeared before the trial court, and pleaded not guilty to the charge, and claimed to be tried. PWs 1 to 16 were examined, Exts. P1 to P22 were marked and MOs 1 to 4 were identified. On closure of prosecution evidence, all the accused were questioned under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., and they denied all the incriminating circumstances brought on record, and claimed to be innocent. No defence evidence was adduced, except marking of D1 contradiction from their side. On appreciating the facts and evidence, and on hearing the rival contentions from either side, the trial court found A1 to A6 guilty under Sections 143 , 147, 148, 353, 332 read with Section 149 of IPC , and convicted them thereunder, but they were acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 307 of . Accused Nos.7 to 10 were found not guilty of all the offences alleged against them, and they were acquitted under Section 235 of Cr.P.C.

4. After hearing accused Nos.1 to 6 on the question of sentence, they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months each and fine of Rs.2000/- each, with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month each under Section 143 of IPC , rigorous imprisonment for one year each and fine of Rs.2,500/- each, with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for six months each under Section 147 of , rigorous imprisonment for one year each and fine of Rs.3000/- each, with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for six months each under Section 148 of , rigorous imprisonment for three months each and fine of Rs.2,500/- each, with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for one month each under Section 353 of and rigorous imprisonment for three years each and fine of Rs.5000/- each, with a default sentence of simple imprisonment for six months each under Section 332 of , with a direction that the substantive sentences shall run concurrently.

5. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, accused Nos.1 and 5 filed Crl. Appeal No.174 of 2008 and accused Nos.2, 3, 4 and 6 filed Crl. Appeal No.223 of 2008.

6. Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned Public Prosecutor.

7. Learned counsel for the appellants would submit that the trial court convicted and sentenced the accused without appreciating the law, facts and evidence in its correct perspective. No documents were there to support the case of prosecution, that the witnesses were engaged in official duty at the time of incident. The test identification parade was conducted after three months of the incident, and even according to the witnesses, the accused persons were familiar to them, and so, no sanctity could be attached to the test identification parade conducted in this case. The injuries sustained by the witnesses are not corresponding to the alleged weapons used.

8.