ORDER : These appeals are filed challenging the Judgment and order of acquittal passed in Criminal Appeal No.40 & 41/2009 dated 10.06.2011 on the file of Fast Track Court-II, at Koppal, acquitting the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 148, 342, 353, 395, 504, 406 r/w. Section 149 of IPC. 2. The factual matrix of the case is that on 19.11.1998 when the PW-2 – Radhakrishna who was working as Manager of Syndicate Bank, Koppal Branch went to the house of the accused No.1 in connection with execution of the warrant in E.P.No.42/1995. The PW-1 bailiff of the Court was also accompanied him. When the Manager went to the house of the accused they abused him in filthy and vulgar language and threatened to kill him and throw his body in to the Munirabad Dam. It is further alleged during the course of incident they have stolen gold chain worth of Rs.12,000/-cash and prevented him from discharging his official function and after assaulting him, they have tied him to the window and confined him. The police came to spot and untied him and thereafter took him to police station and he gave the complaint and based on the complaint the police have registered in Crime No.133/1998 and thereafter investigated the matter and filed the charge sheet. The prosecution to substantiate its case has examined PWs.1 to 7 and got marked Ex.P1 to P9. The defence also got confronted the document Ex.D-1 certified copy of the affidavit in CCC No.450/1999. The material object MO1 was marked. The Trial Judge after considering the evidence available on record particularly the evidence of PW-2 and so also the PW1 and the police witnesses who went to spot have been examined as PW-4 and 5, convicted the accused persons for the charges levelled against them. 3. Being aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction, all the accused have filed the Criminal appeal, which are numbered as Crl.Appeal Nos.40 and 41 of 2011. The first appellate Court re-appreciated the evidence available on record and acquitted all the accused persons for the charges levelled against them. Being aggrieved by the order of acquittal, the present appeal is filed by the State. 4. The main contention of the State is that, the Fast Track Judge was not justified in setting aside the order passed by JMFC Court and did not believe the evidence of PW-2. Being aggrieved by the order of acquittal, the present appeal is filed by the State. 4. The main contention of the State is that, the Fast Track Judge was not justified in setting aside the order passed by JMFC Court and did not believe the evidence of PW-2. The learned JMFC has rightly convicted the accused by relying upon the evidence of PW-2 and so also the PWs.4 & 5 who are the official witnesses who went and untied the PW-2. The reasoning given by the Trial Court is opposed to material on record and it requires interference of this Court. 5. The counsel appearing for the State HCGP Sri. Praveen K. Uppar, in his argument he vehemently contend that, the first appellate Court did not believe the evidence of PW-2, even though he is a Bank manager and his evidence is consistent and though PW1 has not supported the case of the prosecution, but he categorically stated that he himself and PW-1 went to the house of accused No.1. The first appellate Court also did not believe the evidence of PWs-4 and 5 and hence, it requires the interference of this Court. 6. The counsel appearing for the respondent/accused would contend that the first appellate court rightly respondent-appreciated the material available on record and by giving sound reasoning acquitted the accused persons and hence, there is no merit in the appeal. 7. Having heard the arguments of the appellant counsel and also the counsel appearing for the respondent, the point that arises for consideration of this Court is, (i) whether the first appellate court has committed an error in reversing the finding of the trial court and acquitting the accused persons and whether it requires interference of this Court? (ii) What order? 8. Having considered the grounds urged in the appeal and also the respective submissions of both the counsel and it is the case of the prosecution that when the PWs1 and 2 went to execute the warrant issued in the execution petition, the accused No.1 abused PW-2 in a filthy language and thereafter the accused No.2, 3 and 4 have joined together in assaulting him. The said incident has taken place in the presence of PW-1. The said incident has taken place in the presence of PW-1. It is also his case that they have snatched his gold chain and also the money from him and thereafter he was tied to a window and PWs.4 and 5 who got the information through PW-1 came to the spot and untied him and thereafter he was taken to police station and he gave the complaint. 9. The prosecution relied upon PWs-1 to 7 and got marked documents from Ex.P-1 to 9. On perusal of the evidence of PW-1, he did not support the case of the prosecution and only he speaks about he visited the house of the accused and they have shown the stay order granted by the High Court and hence, he did not execute the warrant. He has not spoken anything about the incident. The PW-2 reiterates the complaint averments in his evidence. However, he was subjected to cross-examination. It is his evidence that, he was assaulted by accused Nos.1 to 6 and in order to substantiate his evidence that all of them have assaulted with their hands, he has not taken any treatment and no material available before the Court that he had sustained the injuries and he took the treatment. He has not spoken anything about sustaining injuries. When the accused persons have formed unlawful assembly and assaulted with their hands he ought to have placed the material before the Court. Having taken note of the material available on record, there is no dispute with regard to the case was filed against the accused persons and execution petition was also filed against them and warrant also issued. In order to substantiate the incident except the evidence of PW-2 and also the evidence of PWs-4 and 5, there is no other material before the Court. It is pertinent to note that, it is the evidence of PW-2 all of them have assaulted and in order to substantiate the assault no material is placed before this Court. In order to substantiate the incident except the evidence of PW-2 and also the evidence of PWs-4 and 5, there is no other material before the Court. It is pertinent to note that, it is the evidence of PW-2 all of them have assaulted and in order to substantiate the assault no material is placed before this Court. It is also important to note that PW-2 says that, his money was robbed from him and so also the gold chain was also robbed and there is no any recovery at the instance of the accused persons and in the cross-examination PW-2 admits that, he found the gold chain in the spot itself and hence, it appears the PW-2 exaggerated the incident making the false allegation in the complaint. Though the Trial Judge convicted the accused based on the evidence of PW-2, 4 and, 5 the first appellate Court comes to the conclusion that the evidence of PW-2 cannot be believed. 10. Having taken note of the averments of the complaint and also the evidence of PW.2, he makes different allegations against accused Nos.1 to 6 and in order to substantiate the same, no material is placed before the Court and the First Appellate Court has rightly re-appreciated the material available on record i.e. oral and documentary evidence and no document is placed before the Court with regard to assault made on PW.1 and the evidence of PW.2 remains that the same has not been corroborated by any documentary evidence that he was subjected to assault and he took the treatment and the documents which have been relied upon by the prosecution are only further statement of PW.1, his statement and copy of the attachment warrant spot panchanama and seizure panchanama and in order to substantiate that he was subjected to assault there is no material and in order to comes to the other conclusion that the First Appellate Court has not considered the evidence on record and the evidence of PW.2 also does not inspires the confidence of this Court and at each and every stage he improves his case and makes several allegation against the accused persons and the same has not been supported by an documentary proof. Under these circumstances, the First Appellate Court has given the benefit and not relied upon the evidence of PW.2 and hence, this Court does not find any reasons to come to the other conclusion that the First Appellate Court has committed an error in re-appreciating the evidence. There is no any merit to reverse the findings of the First Appellate Court. 11. In view of the discussions made above, this Court proceed to pass the following : ORDER The appeals are dismissed.