3. P.Ws.1 and 2 are wife and husband. P.Ws.3 to 9 are stated to be eye witnesses to the occurrence. Out of them, P.Ws.3 and 7 to 9 turned hostile to the prosecution. P.W.10 is the Sub Inspector of Police who received Ex.P-1 report from P.W.1 and issued Ex.P-6 FIR. The investigating officer is not examined in the lower court. The lower court, after assessing the evidence on record, did not believe the prosecution case and found the accused not guilty. In the lower court, no medical evidence is produced by the prosecution to prove the alleged offence under Section 324 IPC in order to show that P.Ws.1 and 2 suffered any injuries in the transaction. Admittedly, there is delay of 13 days in giving Ex.P-1 report to the police. No valid explanation is given for the delay. Except the victims P.Ws.1 and 2, no other witnesses supported their evidence regarding abusing in the name of caste. No torn cloths of the victims are produced. There is no dispute that A-3 is working as Filed Assistant in N.R.E.G. Programme in which P.Ws.1 and 2 were working. It is elicited from cross-examination of P.W.5 that bills relating to work under that programme are not paid. Therefore, it is suggested to P.Ws.1 and 2 that because of the dispute regarding non payment of wages under the above programme by A-3, all the accused were roped in in this case. The lower court took note of the fact that because of the delay in giving report, there is possibility of roping in innocent persons into the case. Considering all the evidence on record, the lower court found A-1 to A-5 not guilty of the charges. This Court does not find any infirmity in the judgment passed by the lower court. It is neither improper nor illegal nor irregular.
