MANIK DEVRAO SHINDE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Special leave granted.

(2.) Heard counsel on both sides.

(3.) Ordinarily we would be loathe to interfere with the concurrent finding of guilt recorded by the two courts below, but in the present case we find that the conviction is based on evidence which is far from satisfactory and that has resulted in miscarriage of justice. We find from the judgment of the High court that the only evidence against the accused persons is in the shape of recovery or seizure of certain stolen articles from the hutment allegedly belonging to accused Manik Devrao Pardhi. We find from the Panchnama Exhibit 25 dated 2/6/1981 that certain articles and cash were recovered from that hutment. The evidence of Public Witness 4 shows that he along with the police had entered a hut of the size of 10x 10 and the police had recovered one bag containing certain articles which were attached. He states that no enquiry was made by him as regards the ownership of the hutment. Admittedly the appellants were sleeping in the open outside the hut and in the absence of evidence it is difficult to attribute them to be in the possession of the hutment. We find from the list of articles mentioned in the Panchnama that besides certain articles, cash was also found and was attached on the ground that it was the price received by the sale of stolen articles. No witness was examined to prove this fact. The articles attached are of a common use and there is nothing special about these articles nor is there cogent evidence led to establish the identity of the articles as stolen property. In the circumstances we think that this was a case in which the evidence was far short from what one would expect to bring home the guilt against the accused. In the result we set aside the order of conviction and sentence and acquit accused of charge levelled against them. They will be set at liberty at once. The appeal is allowed accordingly.