BHAIYA BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The only point arising herein is whether the appellant has been successful in establishing his right of self defence, mainly of person and to some extent of property, probabilising with his innocence; and assuming in the alternative that he had established such right, did he exceed it.

(2.) The sole appellant Bhaiya Bahadur Singh, aged about twenty five was a teacher in a Government high school, employed a couple of months prior to the occurrence. He was a resident of village Majhigawan whereat his family owned agricultural lands. His agricultural field known as gadva field adjoined the agricultural field of the victim's family, known as latha field. These were divided by a Mand (demarcation line) which undisputably was higher by about 2-1/2 feet or more from the ground level and was by itself a strip of 10 to 15 feet wide, as described by the prosecution witnesses in hands, used as a passage by the parties. In order to cultivate the gadva land, the appellant's side had to bring their tractor from the village on to the perpendicular boundary line of the victim's land and then to turn to get on to the strip of land aforereferred to and having covered some distance thereon, to get to the gadva field. Within the corner of these two right-angled boundaries lay the latha field of the victim's party.

(3.) As is the prosecution case, about two weeks prior to the occurrence the victim party had seeded a portion of that field by wheat covering that corner and the seed had sprouted. The appellant's tractor was suspected on the day of the occurrence to have damaged a portion of that field in trampling over a good bit of it alongside the boundaries and in particular at the corner. Shortly before the occurrence, i.e., on 22-12-1983 at about 4.30 p.m. the appellant was seen to have brought his driver-driven tractor to his gadva field whereat his two labourers were already present one of whom was Bashistha, PW-1 and the other the latter's brother Rafaddi. The victim's party were present in their field since morning seeding it with wheat. Vishwanath, PW-17, one of the members of the victims while carrying on such work invited attention and required of Bashistha PW-1 to convey to Samay Raj Singh, the father of the appellant, to direct his driver not to trample upon the sprouted wheat crop of the victim's party. Hearing this, as is the case, the appellant went to his house in the village, which is about 1-1/2 furlong away, and brought back a licenced single barrel gun, belonging to a member of his family, whereafter in a quarrelsome mood, using abusive language he fired and with one shot injured two Members of the victims party, namely, Mathura, PW-15 and Ghanshyam, PW-16 and with the second shot, killed Gokaran, another member. The prosecution thus set up a simple straight case of murder and attempt to murder on two counts, besides offence under Section 25(1) (a) of the Arms Act. It has been successful in proving its case beyond doubt in the Courts below. The appellant has been convicted and suitably sentenced details of which are available in the judgment under appeal.