Court finds insufficient evidence of intent to support the conviction for mischief by fire; upholds conviction for criminal trespass and causing hurt.

JUDGMENT:

1. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 4.8.2000 passed in Sessions Case No.237/1995, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Shrirampur, accused nos. 1 and 3 therein have preferred the present appeal. Offense was initially registered against total three accused. Accused no.2 died before framing of the charge in the case. The trial was, thus, proceeded only against accused nos. 1 and 3 i.e. present appellant nos. 1 and 2. Though the appellants were prosecuted for offenses punishable under Sections 436 , 451, 323, 427, 504 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellants for the offenses punishable under Sections 436 , 451 and 323 read with Section 34 of IPC and has acquitted them of the remaining charges.

For the offense under Sections 436 read with 34 of IPC, accused no.1 Raosaheb Avhad is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- and accused no.3 Bhanudas Avhad is sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay fine of Rs.3000/- with default stipulation.

For the offense under Sections 323 read with Section 34 of IPC, accused no.1 Raosaheb Avhad is sentenced to pay fine of Rs.500/- and accused no.3 Bhanudas is sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.500/- with default stipulation.

For the offense under Sections 451 read with Section 34 of IPC, accused no.1 Raosaheb Avhad is sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and accused no.3 Bhanudas is sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.1000/- with default stipulation.

All the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. It was a case of the prosecution that on 7.3.1995, in the evening hours, at about 6.30 p.m., the present appellants along with deceased Govardhan, entered into the shop jointly owned by complainant Suresh Banbheru (PW 3) and Anil Banbheru (PW 2) known as Asha Bhel Center and altercated with them, beat them with fist blows and kicks, threatened them, threw on the person of complainant Suresh the weighing scale and weight measure and, thereafter by pouring kerosene infront of the said Bhel Centre, attempted to burn the Bhel Center.

3. Prosecution material further reveals that prior to occurrence of the aforesaid incident, one more incident had occurred in the morning and, in fact, that had given rise for the occurrence in the evening. It had so happened that in the morning deceased accused Govardhan had kept a table infront of Asha Bhel Center and was at that time opposed by PW 2 Anil and PW 3 Suresh. That time also, some wordy altercation had occurred between deceased Govardhan and PW 2 Anil and PW 3 Suresh. As alleged, deceased Govardhan was intending to run gambling from the said table which was an obstruction for the customers of Asha Bhel Center. After half an hour, deceased Govardhan had removed the said table and left the said place.

4. It is the further case of prosecution that, deceased Govardhan and the present appellants had been to the Bhel Center run by PW 2 and 3 for taking them to task for their opposition to keep the table infront of the Bhel Center. After the alleged occurrence in the evening, complaint was lodged by PW 3 Suresh at Police Station, Sonai upon which a crime was registered against the present appellants and deceased Govardhan and further investigation was carried out. After completing investigation chargesheet was filed against the present appellants and deceased Govardhan.

5. Though from the record of the case no concrete information is revealed as to