DURGACHARAN NAIK Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is brought, by special leave, from the judgment of the Orissa High Court, dated March 2, 1964 in Government Appeal No. 49 of 1963 by which the High Court set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Assistant Sessions Judge of Puri and convicted the appellants under S. 353 of the I.P.C. and sentenced them to 4 months' rigorous imprisonment.

(2.) The decree-holders Panu Sahu and Naba Sahu levied execution of the decree (Ex. Case No. 125/62), in the Court of the Munsif, Puri, against the appellants and a writ of attachment of the moveables of the judgment-debtor was issued for execution through P. W. 2, Sadhu Charan Mohanty, a peon of the Civil Court, Puri, returnable by August 10, 1962. P. W. 2 reached the village of the judgment-debtors on August 10, 1962 at 10 a.m. with the warrant of attachment and asked the judgment-debtors to pay the decretal dues of Rs. 952.10 nP., and when he was going to seize some of the movables, the appellants came there with lathis and resisted him. P. W. 2 sent a report-Ex. 4-to the Court through Nabaghan requesting the Court to give necessary police help. Accordingly on the same day the Munsif wrote a letter, Ex. 2, requesting the Superintendent of Police, Puri, to direct the Officer-in-charge, Sadar Police Station, to give immediate police help to the process server. In pursuance of this letter, P. W. 1, the Assistant Sub-Inspector, Sadar Police Station, Puri, was deputed along with two constables including P. W. 3, Constable No. 613. They went to the village Sanua where the writ of attachment was to be executed. P. W. 6 the Naib Sarpanch and P. W. 8 the Chowkidar of the village Chhaitna also accompanied them. On reaching the spot, they found P. W. 2 sitting in front of the house of Durga Charan Naik-one of the judgment-debtors. The A. S. I. then called out Fakir Charan Naik, father of Durga Charan Naik one of the judgment-debtors, who opened the door and paid Rs. 952.10 nP. to the process server, Sadhu Charan Mohanty and obtained a receipt from him. After the money was paid, all of them left the village and at about 7 p.m. while they were crossing a river nearby in a boat, P. W. 1 saw the appellant Durga Charan with 10 or 12 persons coming from the opposite direction. On seeing them, P. W. 1 apprehended some trouble and directed P. W. 2 to hand over the money to the Chowkidar, P. W. 8. When all of them got down from the boat, appellant Charan forcibly dragged the A. S. I. An number of other persons including the other appellants assembled at the spot. Durga Charan threatened to assault the A. S. I. if he did not return the money. Durga Charan also searched his pockets and Netrananda threatened the A. S. I. by saying that he would not leave the place until the money was returned. When P. W. 1 wanted to write a report to his police station, Netrananda obstructed him by holding his right hand. Bipra and Jugal caught hold of the hands of P. W. 2 and took him to the river bank and demanded return of the money. Then at the intervention of some outsiders the appellants left the spot. P. W. 1 lodged the first information report at the police station next morning and after investigation the appellants were charge-sheeted and committed to the Court of Sessions.

(3.) The appellants were charged under Ss. 143/402, I. P. C. on the allegation that they formed an unlawful assembly with the common object of committing dacoity, Durga Charan, Jugal, Bipra along with three others were further charged under S. 186, I. P. C. for having voluntarily obstructed P Ws. 1 and 2 in the discharge of their public duty. Durga Charan and Netrananda were also charged under S. 353, I. P. C. for having used criminal force against P. W. 1 and Bipra Charan and Jugal were similarly charged under S. 353, I. P. C. for having used criminal force against P. W. 2 while both of them were discharging their duty as public servants. The Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the appellants of all the charges. The State Government took the matter in appeal to the Orissa High Court which set aside the order of acquittal with regard to the 4 appellants and convicted them under S. 353, I. P. C. The High Court, however, held that there was no satisfactory evidence to convict the appellants under Ss. 143/402, I. P. C., As regards the charge under S. 186, I. P. C., the High Court expressed the view that the prosecution was barred under the provisions of S. 195, Cr. P. C.