A Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) court has acquitted a man accused of illegally cutting a neem tree outside a Swaminarayan temple, ruling that the prosecution failed to establish his involvement in the offence.
The case remained pending for more than 11 years, from its registration in July 2015 to the judgment delivered on October 14, 2026, by NS Sayyad, Judicial Magistrate First Class, PMC Court.
The civic body had filed the case against Bharat Dhanji Thakkar under the Maharashtra (Urban Areas) Protection and Preservation of Trees Act, 1975, following a complaint about alleged unauthorised tree cutting on June 27, 2014.
According to the prosecution, Rajendra Popat Kalaskar, a horticulture technician with the PMC’s garden department, inspected the spot after receiving information about the incident. He found that the upper portion of a neem tree had been removed, leaving its trunk about three to four feet above the ground.
Kalaskar prepared a spot panchnama, took photographs and submitted a report to the civic administration. PMC subsequently issued two notices to Thakkar. As he did not respond, the civic body initiated criminal proceedings against him.
During the trial, the prosecution examined Kalaskar and submitted documents, photographs, a compact disc and copies of the notices. However, the court noted that Kalaskar had not witnessed the tree being cut and could not identify the tool used. No eyewitness was examined, statements from nearby residents had not been recorded, and the original complainant was not examined during the trial.
{{/usCountry}}During the trial, the prosecution examined Kalaskar and submitted documents, photographs, a compact disc and copies of the notices. However, the court noted that Kalaskar had not witnessed the tree being cut and could not identify the tool used. No eyewitness was examined, statements from nearby residents had not been recorded, and the original complainant was not examined during the trial.
{{/usCountry}}The court observed that no portion of the allegedly cut tree had been seized as evidence, leaving the circumstances of the incident unclear. Holding that the prosecution had failed to prove Thakkar’s involvement beyond reasonable doubt, the court acquitted him under Section 255(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
It also cancelled his bail bond and directed him to furnish a personal bond of ₹15,000 under Section 437-A of the Code, valid for six months.