JUDGEMENT

This Criminal Appeal has been filed under Section 374 (2) of the Cr.P.C. being aggrieved by judgement dated 29.09.2003 passed by Special Judge, SC & ST (POA) Act, 1989 Panna District-Panna (M.P.) in Special Case No.50/2003 whereby t h e appellants-accused have been convicted under Sections 323/34 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 6 months with the fine of Rs.1000/-, Section 294 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for three months and fine of Rs.500/- and Section 3(1)(X) of SC and ST (POA) Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 6 months and fine of Rs.1,000/- with default stipulations.

2. The facts in brief are that appellants-accused did not belong to SC or ST category and victim Halku and Durji belong to Scheduled Caste category.

Appellants-accused were prosecuted under Section 294, 323, 427, 506 Part-II of I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(X) of SC and ST (POA) Act, 1985 regarding an incident dated 23.93.2003 at about 10 am at public place of village Kunakheda P.S. Raipura District Panna where appellants-accused hurled obscene words that caused annoyance to Halku and caused voluntary injuries to Halku and Durji and caused damage to the paddy crop valued Rs.3,000/- of Halku Choudhary and intimidated by threatening the life of Haldu Choudhary and intentionally insulted and intimidated to Halku Choudhary on the basis of caste regarding which a crime No.101/2003 was registered at P.S. Raipura, District Panna.

3. Appellants-accused abjured guilt and prosecution examined Medical Officer Dr. M.L. Choudhary (PW-1), victim Halku (PW-2), witness Bihari (PW-3), Mitthu (PW-4), victim Durji Bai (PW-5), S.I. B.B. Pandey (PW-6), Draupadi (PW-7), S.N. Sharma (PW-8).

4. Appellants-accused advanced the defence that due to political enmity, they have been falsely implicated and examined the resident of village Khusra Prabhu Yadav as (DW-1).

5. Appreciating the evidence, Trial Court acquitted the appellants- accused from the charges of Sections 506 Part-II and 427 of the IPC and convicted under Section 323/34, 294 of I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(X) of SC and ST (POA) Act, 1989 and sentenced as per para-1 of the judgment.

6 . Challenging the conviction and sentence, this appeal has been preferred on the ground that Trial Court failed to interpret the evidence on record and no such offence is proved against the present appellants. Trial Court failed to assess that the prosecution witnesses are silent about the active involvement of the appellants-accused. The story in totality have not been appreciated and overlooked the testimony of medical officer (PW-1) and major contradictions and omissions in the statements of PW-3, PW-4 and PW-6.

7. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 8. Perused the record.

9. Appreciating the testimony of Halku (PW-2), Durji Bai (PW-5), Bihari (PW-3) and Draupadi (PW-7) and testimony of Dr. M.L. Choudhary (PW-1), Trial Court in para 15 of the judgment recorded the finding that on the date of incident appellants-accused Munna Raja caused voluntary injury to Halku by lathi as mentioned in Ex.P-1 and in para 16 recorded the finding that appellant- accused Raja Bhaiya caused voluntary injury to Durji Bai.

10. The involvement of appellants-accused Maharaj Singh has been recorded on the fact that appellant-accused Maharaj Singh was present on the field prior to the incident and his presence was to reap the crop of the field and hurled the filthy words when victims stopped them to cut the crop and all the accused persons chased Halku and Durji which established their common intention alongwith appellant-accused Maharaj Singh. It is also recorded that even in absence of charge, conviction can be recorded with the aid of Section 34 of I.P.C.

11. In para-20 of the judgment, the Trial Court has also recorded the finding that it is not proved beyond doubt that victims have got the possession of the field and they have sowed the crop on the field. When the Trail Court has concluded that it is not proved that victims g