JUDGMENT

Agarwal, J:-

1. Since these appeals are arising out of the same crime number and judgment, therefore, these appeals are heard analogously and are being decided by a common judgment.

2. These appeals under section 374(2) of the Cr.P.C. have been preferred by the appellants being aggrieved with the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 7.8.2018 passed by learned Special Judge, SC & ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Damoh, District Damoh (M.P.) in Special Case No.200009/2016 whereby the appellant-Pravesh Yadav has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 3(2)(iv) of SC & ST (POA) Act and sentenced to undergo R.I. for Life with fine amount of Rs.500/- and section 429 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with fine amount of Rs.500/- with default stipulations. The appellants-Bhagwan Das @ Bhagola Adiwasi and Param @ Malla Adiwasi in connected appeal have been convicted for the offence punishable under section 436/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for Life with the fine amount of Rs.500/- each and section 429 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years with fine amount of Rs.500/- each with default stipulations.

3. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the appellants are innocent. The prosecution story is that Lattu Adiwasi (PW-8) made a report that at about 08 days prior to this incident which took place on 6.10.2015. Grass grown on the boundaries of the field was put to fire but he could prevent that fire as a result of which he did not proceed against the accused persons. Thereafter, on 6.10.2015 at about 10:00 pm, Bhagola Adiwasi and Param Adiwasi called Raju Yadav (absconding) and Pravesh Yadav and abused them thereafter exhorted that his house be put on fire as a result of which Bhagola Adiwasi and Param Adiwasi took a mashal and Raju and Pravesh had taken kerosene oil in a can and had put house of Lattu Adiwasi on fire as a result of which all the household goods including the stored grains got burnt. Besides this, two she goats and one he goat also got burnt and died.

4. It is submitted that the whole story of the prosecution is concocted and is result of old enmity. It is pointed out that incident took place on 6.10.2015. Dehati Nalishi (Ex.P-15) was recorded on 7.10.2015 at 15:30 hours. It is submitted that FIR (Ex.P-16) was lodged on 7.10.2015 at about 21:37 hours. It is submitted that Dehati Nalishi and FIR do not corroborate with the stand taken by Lattu Adiwasi (PW-8) s/o Nandu Gond who is author of both the documents.

5. Learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the objector have opposed the prayer and supports the judgment of the trial Court, submitting that the trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence, hence, no interference is called for. There is no substances in these appeals, hence, the appeals be dismissed.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

7. It is pointed out that Lattu Adiwasi (PW-8) cited Santosh Gond (PW-2) as an eye-witness. He turned hostile. Gunjan Bai (PW-3), too, turned hostile and she admits that on the next day of the incident, she came to know that house of Lattu Adiwasi was put on fire as a result of which his goats got burnt.

8. Lattu Adiwasi (PW-8) has though supported the prosecution case but in para no.6 of his cross-examination, he has stated that on seeing the accused persons, he had ran towards the Police Station. On reaching Police Station, he had recorded the report. He further states that report was not read over to him. He was accompanied with his sister Gunjan Bai (PW-3), Santosh Gond (PW-2) and Sumatrani (PW-9). He admitted that he could not state that as to what was the extent of loss in his house because he is not staying in his village since the date of the incident. In para No.7 of his crossexamination, he has further stated that there were about 15 teak plants, one Chebla (Palash) and mango tree in his agricultural