NANA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD rival submissions on this appeal preferred by the appellant -original sole accused challenging the judgment and order of conviction dated 28.10.1999 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Washim.

(2.) BY the impugned judgment and order, the present appellant -accused was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 2,000/ -, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. The appellant -accused was acquitted for another offence punishable under section 3(2)(iii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

(3.) THE case of the prosecution in nutshell is that in the afternoon of 25.4.1996, the present appellant set on fire eight huts of sugarcane cutting labourers on the ground that their Mukardam was not ready to do the work of sugarcane cutting from the field of the appellant -accused prior to the work of other agriculturists. According to the prosecution, the incident occurred at about 2.00 pm. On 25.4.1996, PW 2 Meerabai, wife of the first informant PW 1 Dadarao S/o. Govind Aale, was alone at her hut, which was the temporary abode created by the sugarcane cutting labourers. That time she saw appellant -accused coming to the spot and setting on fire all the huts including her hut. According to the case of the prosecution and as transpired from the spot panchanama, which is an admitted document and which is Exh. 16, found that all the huts, which were set on fire, were in the field of one Babarao Shriram Thakare, resident of Gawha, which is the place within the boundary limits of village Vitholi. At the time of the incident, the sugarcane labourers including their in -charge Mukardam PW 3 Bhagwan S/o. Tukaram Chavan and first informant PW 1 Dadarao, were working in the same village Vitholi, but in the another field, cutting the sugarcane for one sugarcane factory. PW 2 Meerabai, wife of first informant, after witnessing that accused had set the said huts on fire, rushed to the agricultural field, where the other workers were doing the work. On knowing the incident, they all rushed and ran towards their huts, but in the meantime, all the huts were completely burnt and all the belongings of these labourers were destroyed. On that evening, a written complaint was lodged (Exh. 10) by PW 1 Dadarao, husband of eyewitness woman. It was lodged with Manora Police Station, in which, it is specifically mentioned that the total loss for the ten families was about Rs. 1,03,000/ -. On the basis of said written complaint, formal First Information Report form was taken down on that evening and offence was registered against the present appellant -accused for the offence punishable under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code and apparently for the offence under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, as initial charges were such, as mentioned in the First Information Report, which is Exh. 15. At the time of framing of the charge, the trial Court took care and framed the charge (Exh. 6) for the offence punishable under Section 436 of the Indian Penal Code and for the offence punishable under Section 3(2)(iii) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.