LAWS(BOM)-2008-3-302

DONGAR SHANKARLAL SONAWANE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On March 19, 2008
Dongar Shankarlal Sonawane Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to judgement rendered by learned IInd Adhoc Additional Sessions Judge, Dhule, in Sessions Case No. 48 of 2004. By the impugned judgement, the appellant is convicted for offence punishable under section 435 of the I.P. Code and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three (3) years and pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for nine (9) months and also is convicted for offence punishable under section 4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Properties Act, 1984 and is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three (3) years and pay a fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for nine (9) months.

(2.) Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that on 2nd April, 2001, PW Ambu was on duty as watchman in forest area of Virkhel Shivar. He noticed that fire broke in compartment No. 216 (Cook No. 26 and 36). The grass (hay) standing on the forest land was caught by fire. Fire flames were emanating and, therefore, PW Ambu alongwith another watchman by name Bahiram rushed to the place. With help of some villagers, they extinguished the fire. They saw that the present appellant was running away from near the place. The appellant was intercepted and caught. A matchbox was recovered from his possession. He was rushed to the office of Forest Guard. The appellant explained that the matchbox was with him because he was searching for silver ornament of his wife which had fallen somewhere in the forest area. A panchanama of the place was carried out. It was found that some grass, dry leaves, etc. were burnt and some of the plants were damaged due to the fire. The appellant was chargesheeted for causing damage to the public property and committing the mischief by fire.

(3.) The appellant pleaded "not guilty" to the charge. He denied truth into the accusations. His defence was that of total denial.