JUDGMENT The appellant was convicted and sentenced for committing offences under S. 3 (i) (x) of the Scheduled castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) and under S. 506 IPC and was ordered to undergo R.I. for six months and fine of Rs. 500/- for each of the two offences. In default of payment of fine he was directed to undergo R.I. for two months. The two sentences were directed to run concurrently. ' This appeal has been preferred by the appellant from jail. Presecution story in short is that on 22.8.93 at about 8.00 a.m. the informant was at his house alongwith his family members, the appellant came there and abused him. The appellant is alleged to have tried to enter into the house stated that he would kill the informant while going to the school. After investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet under Ss. 294 and 506 IPC and under S. 3 (1) (x) of the Act The appellant was, however, acquitted for the charge under S. 294 IPC. The prosecution in support of its case examined 5 witnesses. P. W. 1 Kailash is the informant himself and he has stated that the appellant abused him in presence of other persons at his house. PW 2 Pushpabai is the wife of PW 1 Kailash, who has supported the case of the prosecution and has specifically stated that the appellant abused the informant addressing him as 'Harijan'. PW 3 Tukaram has supported the prosecution case about abuses hurled by the appellant Although PW 1 Kailash and PW 2 Pushpabai have stated that the appellant abused the informant by saying them to do 'Harijan' but this witness Tukaram, who according to Kailash and Pushpabai was also present at the time of occurrences, has not stated anything about the alleged abuses made by the appellant regarding caste of the informant. PW 4 Gajanand, who according to Kailash and Pushpabai was also present at the place of occurrence, has also not supported PW 1 Kailash in all particulars, so far as allegation of informant about he being abused as a member of scheduled caste is concerned. PW 5 K.L. Pawar is the police officer who recorded the first information report and has proved the same. PW 5 K.L. Pawar is the police officer who recorded the first information report and has proved the same. The consistent evidence of the prosecution witnesses that the informant was abused but I do not find that the evidence of PW 1 Kailash and PW 2 Pushpabai regarding he being abused in public as a member of scheduled caste, stands proved by other witnesses. In that view of the matter, I give benefit of doubt to the appellant so far as conviction under S. 3 (1) (x) of the Act is concerned, and accordingly conviction of the appellant under S. 3 (1) (x) of the Act is hereby set aside as also the sentence thereunder. As has already been held earlier, there is consistent evidence that the appellant abused the informant and as such his conviction under S. 506 IPC is fit to be maintained. The appellant is in custody since 15.9.94 and thus he is in jail for a period of nearly 4 months. In my opinion, the period for which the appellant has remained in jail will meet the ends of justice and shall be sufficient sentence for offence under section 506 IPC. In the result, conviction and sentence of the appellant under S. 3 (1) (x) of the Act is hereby set aside. Fine in respect of this offence, if paid, shall be refunded to the appellant after due verification. The conviction of the appellant under S. 506 IPC is maintained. However, the period of sentence shall be the period for which the appellant has already remained in jail. With the aforesaid modification in conviction and sentence the appeal is party allowed. The appellant be set at liberty, if not required to be detained in any other case.