DATTATRAYA NARAYAN SHITOLE Vs. SADASHIV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B.A. Shinde h/for Mr. V.P. Latange, Advocate for the Applicants, Mrs. Rashmi Kulkarni, Advocate h/for Mr. S.D. Kulkarni, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 and Mrs. Pratibha Bharad, A.P.P. for the State of Maharashtra. With the assistance of learned counsel for the respective parties, I have gone through the impugned judgment and also the record.

(2.) The present Cri.Revn.Appln. is filed by first informant - Dattatraya Narayan Shitole, on whose report dated 2nd May, 1996, CR No.117/1996 was registered against Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 with Police Station, Shrigonda, Dist. Ahmednagar for the offences punishable U/Section.s. 436, 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After the trial in Sessions Case No.264 Of 1996, the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar vide his Judgment and Order dated 27th February, 2001 was pleased to acquit Resp.Nos. 1 to 3 for the offences punishable U/Section.s. 436, 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The State has not preferred Criminal Appeal questioning the correctness of the Judgment and Order of acquittal.

(3.) As per the prosecution case before the court below, on 1st May, 1995 at 23.00 hrs. first informant - Dattatraya, his brother Bapu, his parents and wife Lalita were slipping outside the hut. Smt. Rajubai was the wife of Bapu. They have one son by name Ghanashyam, who was 2 1/2 years old at the relevant time. Since Ghanashyam was having fever, Rajubai was sleeping inside the hut with him; where-as other members of the family were sleeping outside the hut. First informant woke-up due to dog barking that time, he noticed presence of Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Respondent No.1 alighted match stick and set the hut of first informant on fire. Resp.Nos. 1 to 3 thereafter ran away. He could notice Resp.Nos. 1 to 3 in the light of the flames. Due to hue and cry raised by him, other family members woke up and the neighbourers also gathered at the spot. They tried to extinguish the fire however, since water was not available, fire was not extinguished, resulting into death of Rajubai and Ghanashyam. From the First Information Report and also case which was unfolded during the course of evidence, it was noticed that, dispute in respect of the agricultural land in between first informant and Resp.Nos. 1 to 3 was pending. PW No.7 Bapu Shripati Bhosale was related to both the first informant and Resp.Nos. 1 to 3. The court below on appreciation, found that the prosecution has failed to prove its case and therefore, acquitted Resp.Nos. 1 to 3.