JASHWANT KHIMABHAI BARIYA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A question of great relevance at the momentous times we are passing through is raised in this revision application. The question raised is:- If leaders of a political party take out an avowedly peaceful procession in exercise of their right of peaceful protest in regard to a public question and if in the course of that procession some undesigned stone-throwing takes place can the leaders be said to be the members of an unlawful assembly It arises on the following facts.

(2.) On September 8 1968 at about 8-00 p.m. a public meeting sponsered by petitioner No. 1 was held under the auspices of Samyukta Socialist Party at the Botad Chowk in the town of Gadhada. It appearts that there were certain grievances against the Mamlatdar in respect of the discharge of his public duties. There were also some grievances against one Laxmanbhai who was at the material time the President of the Taluka Panchayat of Gadhada. The meeting was called to ventilate the grievances of the public against the Mamlatdar and Laxmanbhai. It was presided over by petitioner No. 2 and addressed by petitioner No. 5. A call was given at the meeting that a procession should be taken to the house of the Mamlatdar chanting the name of God Rama RAM DHUN. It is the prosecution case that in the course of the procession which was taken out in response to this call given by petitioner No. 5 slogans were shouted demanding the dismissal of the Mamlatdar. It is also alleged that slogans directed against Laxmanbhai were also raised by using the expression HAI HAI. The procession led by the leaders proceeded in the direction of the bungalow of the Mamlatdar. Neither the Mamlatdar nor Laxmanbhai the president of the Taluka Panchayat was present at his residence. Some of the processionists are alleged to have thrown stones at the bungalows of the Mamlatdar and of some other officers situated in the same neighbourhood before they dispersed. As a result of the stone-throwing slight damage estimated at Rs. 50/was caused to a State Transport Bus. It is also the prosecution case that a truck bearing No. G. T. S. 5729 also sustained some damage on account of the breaking of glass-panes. The damage was estimated at about Rs. 400.00. There is no clear evidence as regards the damage if any to the glass panes of the windows of the bungalows. The panchnama merely shows that some stones were scattered in the courtyards of the bungalows. According to the prosecution the incident culminating in the stone-throwing occurred at about 11-00 p.m. At about 12 midnight P. W. 15 Bhikhabhai Kalubhai (the driver of motor truck No. G. T. S. 5729 which had sustained damage by stone-throwing) lodged the first information report (Ex. 66). And as a result thereof the petitioners along with 31 others were prosecuted for offences under secs. 147 447 336 337 & 427 of the Indian Penal Code and sec. 25 of the Indian Telegraph Act read with sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Botad who tried the said Case Criminal Case No. 968 of 1968 acquitted 31 out of the 36 accused. The five petitioners who were arraigned as accused Nos. 1 2 3 4 & 8 were however convicted for offences under sec. 147 336 and 427 read with sec. 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Petitioner No. 1 and petitioner No. 5 accused No. 8) were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one month and to pay a fine of Rs. 200.00. In default of payment of fine they were directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a further term of 15 days. Petitioners Nos. 2 3 and 4 were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 15 days and to pay a fine of Rs. 100.00. In default of payment of fine they were directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days. The petitioners approached the Sessions Court at Bhavnagar by way of Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 1969. The learned Sessions Judge confirmed the findings recorded by the trial Court and dismissed the appeal. And this has given rise to the present revision application preferred by the five petitioners.

(3.) This being a revision I will proceed on the assumption that the findings of facts recorded by the learned Sessions Judge are correct. These findings would go to show that a public meeting had taken place at the Botad Chowk. Petitioner No. 5 at the conclusion of his address had given a call to go to the house of the Mamlatdar chanting RAM DHUN. They had in the course of the procession raised the slogns demanding the dismissal of the Mamlatdar and they had also raised the slogan HAI HAI addressed to Laxmanbhai. Before the procession dispersed some stone-throwing had taken place as a result of which some stones were found from the bungalows in the neighbourhood. A glass-pane of a motor truck was broken and damage estimated at Rs 400/was caused. I must also accept the finding that damage worth Rs. 50/was caused to a State Transport Bus as a result of the pelting of the stones It is also common ground that there is no evidence to show that any of the petitioners had themselves indulged in stone-throwing or that any of them had advocated use of violence or abetted the throwing of the stones. The petitioners have been found guilty by reason of the fact that they were the leaders and were participants of the procession which culminated in this incident. The reasoning which found favour with the learned Sessions Judge in holding the petitioners guilty is reflected in paragraph 20 of his judgment which may for the sake of preciseness be quoted:-