STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. KANBI UMA MAHADEVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused and the complainant are members of the Kanbi community. The Kanbi community is divided into three sub-castes; (1) Nenava (2) Dhaka and (3) Dhanera. The accused and the complainant belonged to Nenava sub-caste which is also known as Vaged panch. The complainant Hira Jama and his relations also belonged to this Panch. It was said that the 1st accused felt aggrieved against the complainant as he suspected that the complainant had given certain information to the police as a result of which the police raided his house for opium. On the 15th of April 1959 the 1st accused called a meeting of his sub-caste viz . Vaged panch at his house and at that meeting the complainant Hira Jama and his relations were excommunicated by a resolution which was reduced to writing. That resolution was not produced by the accused at the trial. Witness Akbarmiya Jamiyatmiya was called at the meeting and it was he who had written out the resolution which was dictated to him at that meeting and which resolution excommunicated Hira Jam and his relatives. On coming to know of this resolution Hira Jama obtained the sanction of the District Magistrate and on the 3rd of November 1959 filed the present complaint under sec. 4 of the Bombay Prevention of Excommunication Act XLII of 1949 In the written statements filed by the accused Exs. 27 to 43 they raised two contentions:

(2.) The trial Magistrate rejected both the contentions of the accused and held that Hira Jama and his relations did belong to the Vaged panch and that the resolution excommunicating them was passed at the meeting by the accused. He also held that the Act applied to the said resolution; that the resolution amounted to excommunication of Hira Jama and his relations and that consequently the accused were guilty under section 4 of the Act. During the course of the hearing of the Revision Application before the learned Sessions Judge it was not disputed that (1) on the 18th of April 1959 a meeting of the Vaged panch; was held at the house of the 1st accused; (2) that that meeting was held at the instance of the 1st accused; (3) that all the accused were present at that meeting together with the other members of the Vaged panch; and (4) the resolution expelling Hira Jama and his relations was passed at that meeting.

(3.) Mr. Barot who appears for the accused raised two contentions: