The prosecution must establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt, which was not proven in this case.

1. The State of Maharashtra has filed this appeal against an order of acquittal passed by the Ad-hoc Additional Sessions Judge-2, Khamgaon on 14th July, 2009 acquitting 11 accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 143 ,147,148,452,324,326 and 506 (II) read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as the “SC ST Act”).

2. The prosecution’s case in short is that one Prabhakar Shankar Pahurkar (complainant-PW 3) was residing at village Bhongaon, Taluka Shegaon, District Buldhana along with his family. His family consists of his wife, parents, brothers, their wives and they belong to Buddhist community. Accused also was residing in the same village. There has been rivalry and hostility against each other. It is prosecution’s case that on 15th November 2002 at about 1.30 p.m. accused Rajendra Shelke and Ganesh Shelke were playing cards in front of grocery shop of PW 3 and when PW 3 asked them not to gamble in front of his shop, accused Rajendra and Ganesh abused him in the words “Dhedgyachya Pora Tu Dukanat Bais Jast Shahanpana Karu Nakos”. Later, in the evening all accused armed with sticks, iron rods, iron pipes and sword came to the house of PW 3 and again abused him in the words “Maharachya Pora Dhedgya Bharachya Baher Nigh”. They pushed his wife and entered his house and assaulted him, his father and brother by means of weapons which they had. The crime was registered, charges were framed and the accused pleaded not guilty. In view of what would follow now, this Court felt that there was no need to record too many details. Accused pleaded not guilty and the defence was of total denial.

3. To prove the case, prosecution examined 15 witnesses. PW 1-Laxman Gawai (Panch witness), PW2 Devidas Tayade (Panch witness), PW 3 Prabhakar Pahurkar (complainant), PW 4- Kavita Prabhakar Pahurkar (wife of complainant), PW 5- Sk. Rafique Sk. Jainuddin (panch witness, PW 6-Sudhakar Pahurkar (brother of complainant), PW 7-Shyam Pahurkar (brother of complainant), PW 8-Ram Pahurkar (brother of complainant), PW 9-Satish Bajare (Panch witness), PW 10-Dilip Pahurkar (brother of complainant), PW 11-Panjabrao Devidas Karhale (Panch witness), PW 12 Keshav Ingle (Panch witness), PW 13-Shatnkumar Imle, who carried the injured to the hospital, PW 14- Sahebrao Mahadu Jagdale (Police Officer who recorded oral report), PW 15-Dr. Premchand Dipulal Pandit (Medical Officer). Most importantly the Investigating Officer, Dy. Superintendent of Police, Tadasane has not been examined. Of the 15 witnesses PW 1, PW 2, PW 5, PW 9, PW 10, PW 11 and PW 12 turned hostile. The trial Court after considering the evidence of all the witnesses, who supported prosecution and who all are brothers and wife of complainant has picked up contradictions in their testimony/statements. It is pertinent to note PW 10 who is brother of complainant has also turned hostile. The Court, after considering the medical reports has also concluded that father of the complainant and witnesses PW 6, PW 7, PW 8, PW 9 and PW 10 have not even suffered injuries as claimed by the prosecution.

4. As regards the charge under Section 3 of the SC ST Act, the trial Court after considering the caste certificate produced by the complainant, which is Exh.-108 (only true copy is available in the R. & P.) has correctly stated that the caste certificate does not mention anywhere that complainant PW 3 belongs to Mahar caste. The certificate shows complainant belongs to Buddhist community. According to the complainant, before he converted to Buddhism he belonged to Mahar caste. Having examined the documents it does not say anywhere that before conversion