RAM DEV Vs. DHAMESHWAR SHARMA & OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is preferred by the appellant under Sec. 372 of the Code Criminal Procedure assailing the judgment of acquittal dated 29.7.2009, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, H.P., in Sessions Trial No.54 of 2008, whereby, the accused persons have been acquitted of the charges framed against them.

(2.) Briefly stating, as per prosecution story, facts giving rise to the present appeal, are that on 16.7.2007 at about 12.00 noon, Ram Dev, complainant was intimated by his brother Chiranji Lal that his shop, which was existing on the government land, had been set on fire. Chiranji Lal noticed his brother, accused Dhameshwar and his sons, namely Lalit Kumar and Dimple, running from the side of the shop. The said shop along with one room had been constructed by him on government land during the year 1979, when Dhameshwar and his brother Chiranji Lal were joint, the same had fallen to his share and the other shop had fallen to the share of his brother Dhameshwar, after partition in the year 1988. It has been averred that on such information, the complainant and other co-villagers reached at the spot and the Fire Brigade controlled the fire. Damage was caused to the furniture, bedding, utensils and confectionary items, which was stated to the tune of Rs.1,00,000.00. It has further been averred that the accused had set the shop on fire to occupy the land. The incident was reported to the police, on which, FIR Ext.PW1/A was registered. During the course of investigation, the police took into possession ash, burnt wood and coal from the spot, vide memo Ext. PW5/A, which was stated to be signed by Ms. Ram Pyari, PW5 and Ghanshyam. Photographs of the scene of crime were also taken, which are Exts. PW12/A to PW12/F and negatives whereof are Exts. PW12/G to PW12/M. The demarcation of the land was conducted by Hem Singh, Patwari PW9 and Tatima Ext.PW9/A and jamabandi Ext.PW9/B were procured. Exts. PW8/A and PW11/A respectively were the records of the sanction of water and electricity connection.

(3.) The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined thirteen witnesses. The statement of the accused under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C. was recorded. No defence witness was examined by the accused.