(1.) Being dissatisfied by the judgment dated 26.9.1997 passed by the learned Special Judge under SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in special case No. 89/97, thereby finding the appellants guilty of the offence punishable under Section 3(1)(x) of SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') convicted each of them for six months RI with fine of Rs. 500/- each, in default of payment of fine each shall suffer additional RI for one month, the appellants have preferred this appeal. Facts of the prosecution case as unfurled before the trial Court were that the complainant Gyarsibai belongs to Bhil Caste and she being a member of Schedule Tribe, on 22.6.1995 at about 4.00 PM in the evening when she was sitting in her house along with her family members at that time, appellants-accused persons came there, in the house and after entering in the house they started saying that "Bhildo Ki Kya Aaukat Hai" and asked them to come out of the house and deliver the possession of the house to them. They after saying so started throwing the belongings of the complainant. They also started 'Marpeet' and abused her and when her younger brother Sattu, came to her rescue, the appellant No. 2 Shankarlal, started abusing her by saying 'Bhilne' and when her sister Badamibai, came to her rescue, appellant No. 3 Dashrath, started abusing her and also caused injuries to her. Thereafter, they forcefully took possession of the house. The matter was reported by the complainant-Gyarsibai, on 23.6.1995 at 11.00 AM vide Exhibit P/5. She was medically examined. She also filed her caste certificate after obtaining it from Grampanchayat -Palsoda. On the basis of FIR spot map was prepared and after investigation challan was filed against them under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act. 3.
(2.) The trial Court after appreciation of the evidence of PW3 -Gyarsibai, PW5 - Badamibai, PW6 - Lalibai and PW8 - Bhalibai, Sarpanch of Grampanchayat Palsoda, came to the conclusion that complainant was insulted and intentionally humiliated being a member of Schedule Tribe and convicted them under Section 3(1)(x) of the Act by the impugned judgment as afore noted.
(3.) It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that there is delay of one day in lodging the FIR. He also submitted that PW4 - Sattu and PW7 - Ratanlal, have not supported the case of the prosecution. He also drew my attention to the statements of PW5 and PW6 and submitted that as per the statement of PW5 the only allegation against the appellants that they have stated the following version "Bhilne Iss Makaan Mein Mat Rehena " and as per stated of P W6 they called her has 'Bhilne', which does not amounts to the intentionally insulting with intend to humiliate the member of Schedule Tribe and prays that the impugned judgment be set aside and appellants be acquitted from the alleged offence.