Lack of Evidence and Perverse Trial Findings Lead to Acquittal in NTPC Project Inauguration Case
The Jharkhand High Court has set aside the conviction and sentence of MLA Yogendra Sao, who was previously found guilty of various charges, including assault and obstruction during the inauguration of a National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC) residential project. Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, presiding over the case, found that the trial court and appellate court had made serious errors in their judgments, leading to a perverse outcome unsupported by the evidence.
The case stemmed from an incident on August 17, 2010, when MLA Yogendra Sao and others were accused of causing a disturbance at an NTPC project inauguration in Hazaribag. The allegations included abuse, assault, and obstruction of public servants. Sao was convicted under several sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Sections 323/149, 341/149, 504/149, and 353/149, with sentences ranging from 15 days to one year of simple imprisonment.
However, the High Court found that there was no specific evidence against Sao, noting that while witnesses identified him, they did not attribute any overt acts or instigation to him. The judgment highlighted inconsistencies in the trial court's findings, particularly the acquittal of another accused who faced direct allegations, suggesting a lack of consistency in the application of justice.
In its detailed analysis, the High Court noted that the trial court had erred in its interpretation of the evidence, which was not sufficient to support the conviction. The court emphasized that a conviction should be based on clear and specific evidence, which was lacking in this case. Consequently, the court allowed the criminal revision and acquitted Sao of all charges.
The decision has been seen as a significant development in the case, raising questions about the initial investigation and prosecution process. It also underscores the importance of a thorough and unbiased review of evidence in criminal cases, particularly when public figures are involved.
Sao, who had been on bail, is now discharged from all liabilities related to the case, and the sureties are also released. The court ordered that a copy of the judgment, along with the trial court records, be sent back to the concerned court for necessary actions.
Bottom Line :
The conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Sections 323/149, 341/149, 504/149, and 353/149 IPC were set aside as there was no specific evidence attributing any overt act or instigation by the petitioner, and the findings of the Trial Court and Appellate Court were deemed perverse and unsupported by the weight of evidence.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 323/149, 341/149, 504/149, 353/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
Yogendra Saw @ Yogendra Sao v. State of Jharkhand, (Jharkhand) : Law Finder Doc id # 2964339
