The additional District Court in Pune on Wednesday acquitted 4 persons accused for the charges of attempt to murder (IPC 307). The 4 persons had attacked a Maulana from a Masjid who allegedly had shared obscene and vulgar images of Hindu Gods on social media.
Brief story of the prosecution:
The incident had occurred in the year 2014. According to the story narrated by the Public Prosecutor, Adv Premkumar Agarwal, on 31st May 2014, some obscene and vulgar pictures of Hindu Gods went viral on social media. It created tension in the various Hindu-Muslim groups in Pune City. The present incident was a result of the tension.
The Victim on 1st June 2014 was returning back to his home after reading namaz in a mosque. He was waiting outside the mosque with his brother when the accused came on a bike and started beating them with wooden logs.
According to the prosecution, the accused persons were beating the victim without any reason. The victim had nothing to do with obscene images shared on social media. Only because of the tensions between the Hindu-Muslim groups, the accused came and attempted to murder the victim.
Defense taken by the accused:
Adv Milind D. Pawar appeared on behalf of the accused. He submitted in defense of the accused that they were falsely implicated in the case. The accused had nothing to do with the incident. He submitted that the victim had lodged a complaint against the accused only on the basis of directions given to him by some of the rival Muslim group members.
To support his contentions, the advocate on behalf of the accused relied on the admissions taken by him from the victim during his cross-examination. The victim during his cross-examination had admitted that he originally hailed from West Bengal and couldn’t understand Marathi. He further admitted that he did not know the reason why the accused had beaten him.
This was contrary to the complaint lodged by him wherein he had clearly mentioned that the accused persons have beaten him because they thought that he had shared the obscene pictures on social media.
Further, the advocate on behalf of the accused submitted that the prosecution has not examined any direct eye-witnesses. All the witnesses examined are interested witnesses and thus evidence given by them cannot be relied upon.
After perusing all the records and hearing out both parties the court ruled that enough evidence is not available on record to convict the accused persons. The court also found some material omissions in the prosecution’s case which led to the order of acquittal.
Story by Harshwardhan Pawar – Intern