Harsh Kumar, J. - (1.) Heard learned AGA and perused the record.
(2.) By the impugned judgment and order dated 26.10.2016 in Special S.T. No.11 of 2009, the Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Hamirpur has convicted and sentenced the accused-respondents for the offences under sections 323 and 324 IPC and acquitted them from the charges under sections 504 IPC and 3 (i) (x) S.C./S.T. Act.
(3.) Upon hearing learned AGA and perusal of record, I find that as per prosecution case, the incident in question taken place on 3.9.2006 at the fields and in the alleged incident, the accused-respondents committed marpeet and called the first informant and his associates with caste name and intentionally insulted them with an intention to provoke breach of peace. Learned Trial Judge after analysing the entire evidence on record has held that the incident of marpeet did take place and certain injuries were caused by accused-respondents to prosecution party and so the trial court convicted the accused-respondents for the offences under sections 323/34 and 324/34 IPC and sentenced each of them with a fine of Rs.500/- under section 323/34 IPC and Rs.1000/- under section 324/34 IPC with default clause. The trial court analysing the evidence on record has specifically held that the fact of calling the first informant and his brother with caste name at public place has not been proved beyond doubt and the specific words, which were allegedly uttered during the incident by the accused-respondents or any of them have not been stated by the prosecution witnesses in their statements on oath.;