Pune tree activist Vinod Raichand Jain has been acquitted by a sessions court, which set aside his 2018 conviction in a criminal case linked to an alleged altercation at the Pune Municipal Corporation’s Garden Department office in 2010. The court found that the prosecution had not produced cogent and clinching evidence to establish criminal force, intimidation or damage to public property.
Additional Sessions Judge Moreshwar S. Kulkarni passed the order in Jain’s criminal appeal against the judgment of a Judicial Magistrate First Class court. Jain had been sentenced in January 2018 to six months of rigorous imprisonment after being convicted under Sections 353 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984.
The case originated on February 17, 2010, when an FIR was registered at Deccan police station on a complaint by then PMC Garden Superintendent Ashok Ghorpade. According to the prosecution, Jain and co-accused Deepak Wahikar entered the Garden Department office at Sambhaji Park while questioning permissions granted for tree felling. Officials alleged that Jain threw a paperweight, broke a glass door, damaged office trophies and threatened staff.
Jain’s lawyers, Manish Desai and Harshad Mandke, argued that the prosecution’s evidence contained major contradictions. A central issue was the production of two printed versions of the FIR. The defence pointed to manual overwriting that appeared to change the date from February 18 to February 17, while another version indicated that the document had been filled on the night of February 18, more than 24 hours after the alleged incident. The word “weight” also appeared to have been inserted by hand after the word “paper”.
The defence further highlighted conflicting accounts about where the incident took place. The primary informant said his cabin had been vandalised but acknowledged during cross-examination that the small 8-by-8-foot cabin had no showcases or trophies. Another official placed the incident in a different cabin, while the senior officer named in the FIR denied being present at the office that day.
The court also considered discrepancies in the physical evidence submitted during the trial. The defence said the broken glass and paperweight were presented in a white envelope, although the spot panchnama recorded that the material had been sealed in brown paper.
Jain had filed petitions and RTI applications concerning alleged illegal tree felling and had been involved in public-interest litigation relating to the issue. The judgment took note of this civic work and of his friction with municipal authorities, but the acquittal was based on the prosecution’s failure to establish the criminal charges with reliable evidence.
After the verdict, Jain said the case had been used to silence activists questioning tree felling and the municipal administration. He described the 16-year legal battle as exhausting and said the judgment vindicated his position that environmental whistleblowing should not be suppressed through criminal cases. The court acquitted him under Section 248(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cancelled his bail bonds and directed that any fine paid be refunded.
