JUDGMENT

This appeal is filed by the appellants-

accused against the judgment and conviction order dated 12.08.2010 on the file of the Special Judge, Bellary in Special Case No.69/2008, for the offence punishable under Sections 341 r/w

34 of IPC and 506 r/w 34 of IPC.

2. Brief facts of the case are as under :

On 30.07.2008 at about 11.30 A.M. complainant G. Kamalamma went to Darur Veerabhadreshwara temple for offering pooja and when she coming back from the temple accused Nos.1 and 2 wrongfully restrained the complainant and not allowed her to go further and also abused the complainant by saying that “Yene nanna mele atrocity casu hakuththiya” by saying so accused No.1 Purushothama Gouda came forward to assault the complainant. He also told her to give amount belongings to the temple, otherwise he would not allow herself and her sister’s son Raghavendra to go. The accused snatched the car key from the hands of complainant’s sister’s son Raghavendra and also pushed him. Thereafter, the accused gave threat to her life. It is also alleged in the complaint that the accused is giving harassment to the complainant and her family members. By that time P.S.I. of Sirigeri Police Station came and took the car key from the accused and was handed over the key to the complainant, thereafter complainant and her sister’s son went to the Police Station and lodged a complaint before the police as per Ex.P1. On the basis of Ex.P1, a case was registered in Crime.No.61/2008 at Sirigeri Police Station and F.I.R was submitted to the Court. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer visited the scene of offence, drawn panchanama in the presence of panchas, recorded the statement of eyewitnesses who were present at the time of alleged incident, after obtaining caste certificate from the concerned authorities charge sheet came to be filed under the above provisions of law.

3. The learned Special Judge after hearing both the sides, framed the charge against the accused persons for the offence punishable under Sections 341 r/w 34 of IPC, 504 r/w 34 of IPC, 323 r/w 34 of IPC, 506 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 3(1)(X) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities)

Act, 1989.

4. The learned Judge held trial of the case and found that the accused have committed offence punishable under Section 341 and 506 r/w 34 of IPC. Learned Judge found that the prosecution has failed to prove the offence alleged against the accused persons punishable under Sections 504 of IPC, Section 3(1)(X) of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 r/w 34 of IPC and Section 323 r/w

34 of IPC.

5. The learned Judge has imposed sentence to pay a fine of Rs.250/- each for the offence punishable under Section 341 r/w Section 34 of IPC by the accused Nos.1 and 2, in default simple imprisonment for 15 days and Rs.2,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 506 (1) r/w Section 34 of IPC, in default simple imprisonment for two months. Being aggrieved by the judgment of the trial Court the appellants-accused have filed this appeal on various grounds.

6. It is contended by the learned counsel for the appellants-accused that the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court is against to the law, evidence and probabilities of the case. The Trial Court has committed error in convicting the appellants on the evidences of prosecution which is highly interested, contradiction, unreliable and artificial. The approach of the trial Court is totally against and erroneous to the case. The trial Court has wrongly came to the conclusion that the accused have committed offence punishable under Sections, 341 r/w 34 of IPC and 506(1) r/w 34 of IPC. The trial Court has committed an error in believing the interested testimony of PW1 and PW4, who are close relative to each other PWs2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 have not supported the case. The accused should have been acquitted on the ground that independent witnesses PWs.2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 have not supported the case of t