The presumption of innocence strengthens in acquittal cases, necessitating proof beyond reasonable doubt for conviction.

JUDGMENT :

Radhakishan Agrawal, J.

1. This acquittal appeal filed by the State/appellant arises out of the judgment dated 10.02.2016 passed by the Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, 'the Act, 1989') Bastar place at Jagdalpur, C.G. in Sessions Trial No.108/2015, whereby the learned trial Court acquitted the accused persons/respondents of the charge under Sections 8(1)(3)(5) of the Chhattisgarh Vishesh Jan Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2005 and Sections 4 & 5 of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908 (for brevity, 'the Act, 1908).

2. Case of the prosecution is that on 10.09.2015 at around 4:30 a.m., the Station House Officer of Police Station Darbha along with the police staff and a patrolling team of the STF, proceeded towards Koleng, Chandamota and Badangpal areas to conduct a search operation for absconding accused persons. On 14.09.2015, while returning from patrolling, the team found two individuals hiding behind bushes near village Bhadrimahu. They were apprehended and upon interrogation, the accused disclosed that they are active members of the banned Maoist organization. On the basis of information given by respondent No.1- Muchaki Deva, one tiffin-bomb, batteries and wires were recovered vide Ex.P-4. Memorandum statement of the accused/respondent No.2- Vijja Podiyami was recorded vide Ex.P-6, pursuant to which, one tiffin-bomb was recovered from the backyard of his house in village Bhadrimahu and the same was seized vide Ex.P-5. Thereafter, vide Ex.P-13, a Dehati Nalisi and vide Ex.P-15 spot map Ex.P-15 were prepared. Subsequently, First Information Report (Ex. P-9) was registered against the accused persons and they were taken into custody vide Exs.P-7 & P-8 respectively.

3. During investigation, statements of witnesses were recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. The seized explosive materials were destroyed with the assistance of the Bomb Disposal Squad (BDS). Soil samples both plain and from the site of the explosion were collected vide Ex.P-3 and thereafter sent it to FSL Raipur for chemical analysis. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused persons before the concerned trial Court. Accused persons abjured their guilt and prayed for trial.

4. The prosecution in order to bring home the offence, examined as many as 10 witnesses in support of its case and exhibited 19 documents connecting the accused persons to the crime in question. However, in their defence, accused persons have examined none, but exhibited four documents i.e. D-1 to D-4.

5. The trial Court, after hearing counsel for the parties and appreciating the evidence on record, by the impugned judgment acquitted, the accused persons/respondents herein of said charges leveled against them.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant / State would submit that the trial Court has erred in acquitting the accused persons/respondents despite sufficient evidence regarding the seizure of explosive materials and their link to the accused persons, which is also evident from the statements of PW-4 Talesphore Minj, PW-5 Nirmal Kumar and PW-10 Durgesh Kumar Sharma, Investigating Officer. Therefore, the impugned judgment of acquittal suffers from perversity and illegality and is liable to be set aside.

7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the accused persons/respondents would support the impugned judgment and submit that there are material contradictions and omissions in the statements of PW-4 Talesphore Minj, PW-5 Nirmal Kumar and PW-10 Durgesh Kumar Sharma, Investigating Officer and their statements do not corroborate with each o