M MYLSAMY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed as against the judgment dated 03.08.2011 passed in Spl.S.C.No.19 of 2010 on the file of the learned Principal District Sessions Judge, Coimbatore, thereby convicting the appellants under Section 323 of IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (PA) Act 1989, and sentenced them to undergo six months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default in payment of fine to undergo two weeks simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (PA) Act and to undergo three months simple imprisonment and pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo two weeks simple imprisonment for the offence under Section 323 of IpC.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that P.Ws.1 and 2 are the parents and P.W.3 is the son and P.W.4 is the son-in-law of P.Ws. 1 and P.W.4 married the daughter of P.Ws.1 and 2 and gave birth a child. While being so, P.W.4 visited P.Ws.1 and 2's house to see his child in a car. While he was taking food, his car which was parked outside their house, hit by one motor cycle and without stopping the motor cycle they were proceeded. The driver of the car P.W.7, chased them. After hearing the noise, P.Ws.1 to 6 came out from their house and had seen that the public assembled and P.W.7, the driver of the car was beaten up by the accused persons. While questioning the same, P.W.4 was attacked by the accused persons and as such he sustained simple injury. While beating P.W.4, the accused insulted him by using their caste name and scolded with filthy language. Thereafter, they are all reached the Government Hospital, Palladam. P.W.18, the Sub Inspector of Police, after receipt of the information went to the Hospital and recorded the statement from P.W.1 and registered a case in Crime No.131 of 2008 for the offence under Section 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST (PA) Act against the accused. P.W.19, the Investigating Officer took up the investigation and filed charge sheet as against the accused persons. The trial Court framed charges as statedand the accused denied the same and claimed for trial.

(3.) The prosecution have examined P.W.1 to P.W.19 and marked Ex.P.1 to Ex.P.20. On the side of the defence examined D.W.1 and Ex.D.1 was marked. The trial Court based on the incriminating evidence, questioned the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., and they denied the same toto. After considering the oral and documentary evidences, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused as stated above. Aggrieved over the same, the accused preferred this appeal.