Dadar man acquitted 22 years after being charged with selling animal skins

A Dadar resident was acquitted by a sessions court after more than 22 years, as the court found that leopard and deer skins might have been planted in his shop by forest department officials. The court also stated that the prosecution failed to prove that the shop belonged to the accused.

The sessions court recently acquitted a Dadar resident, more than 22 years after he was arrested for allegedly selling leopard and deer skins, stating that the skins might have been planted in his shop by forest department officials.

HT Image

As per the prosecution case, the forest department had on April 10, 2001, arrested Kishorkumar Kakde and Dilip Kakde, claiming that they were trying to sell two leopard skins. Forest officials then claimed that the two revealed they had purchased the skins from Ramesh Kinare and Sanjay Mithar for ₹7,000.

The next day, the officials arrested Kinare and Mithar and on that night, they searched Kinare’s shop and sealed it. Two days later, on April 13, 2001, forest officials searched Kinare’s shop again and this time they found the skin of a spotted deer and four boxes containing powder of musk deer.

The four were prosecuted for committing offences punishable under the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, before the metropolitan magistrate court, Dadar. The prosecution examined seven witnesses. On January 10, 2017, the court acquitted three of them and convicted Kinare. He was sentenced to a simple imprisonment of six months following which the 65-year-old challenged the verdict before the sessions court.

During a hearing on July 11, Kinare’s advocate argued that all the prosecution witnesses (PWs) except the panch were officials of the forest department and were interested witnesses.

He further said that forest officer Dyaneshwar Dhondiba Bhagat, who was the complainant and PW2, was not present at the time of the alleged seizure from the shop and he deposed on the basis of documents. The panch witnesses did not support the prosecution case and were subsequently declared hostile, the advocate added.

The sessions court said that the spot where Kinare’s shop was located was a densely populated area, but the prosecution could not find a single independent witness during the search.

“No incriminating material was seized at the time of first panchanama dated April 11, 2001, from the shop of accused no.3 (Kinare) and it was sealed in the presence of one set of panchas. However, the alleged seizure of the skin of a spotted deer from the said shop was made in the presence of a different set of panchas,” the court said while reversing Kinare’s conviction.

“Therefore, it is probable that as no incriminating articles were found at the time of first panchanama, prosecution witness 8 (a forest official) sealed the said shop and thereafter, planted the incriminating articles in the shop of accused no.3 (Kinare) and prepared the second panchanama in the presence of different panch witnesses,” the court added.

Besides, the court said the prosecution had failed to prove that the shop from where the alleged articles were seized was owned by Kinare.