CHELLIAH AND 4 OTHERS Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners - accused 1, 2 and 4 to 6 along with another (accused 3 - acquitted) were the accused in calendar case No. 1417 of 1984 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Dindigul. The learned Magistrate found accused 1 guilty under Sections 323 and 324 I.P.C.; accused 2 u/s. 324 I.P.C. and accused 4 to 6 under Sec. 323 I.P.C and convicted them thereunder while acquitting accused 3. Accused 1 was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 100.00 in default to rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence u/s. 324 I.P.C. and a fine of Rs. 75.00 in default to simple imprisonment for two months for the offence u/s. 323 I.P.C. Accused 2 was sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100.00 in default to rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence u/s. 324 I.P.C. Accused 4 to 6 were sentenced each to a fine of Rs. 50.00 in default simple imprisonment for one month for the offence u/s 323 I.P.C. Aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, an appeal had been preferred in Criminal Appeal No. 18 of 1985 on the file of Court of Session, Madurai North at Dindigal. The appeal so preferred had been dismissed confirming the conviction and sentence on the revision petitioners necessitating them to file the present revision.

(2.) All the accused are resident of Vadakkanpatti. Accused 1 to 3 are brothers. Accused 4 to 6 are respectively the wives of accused 1 to 3. Accused 4 is the daughter of one Palaniappa Pillai, through his first wife, who died some time prior to the occurrence, which happened on 28.8.1980. P.W. 2 is the second wife of the said Palaniappa Pillai. There was a dispute between the members of the family of Palaniappa Pillai regarding the sharing of the properties. The dispute was resolved in a family arrangement and in that family arrangement, P.W. 2. was given 3-1/2 acres of land. Accused 4 and her husband accused 1, even subsequent to the family arrangement, objected to the enjoyment of the land by P.W. 2. The matter was referred to the police and both the parties were called twice and accused 1 and 4 were warned not to interfere with the possession and enjoyment of the lands of P.W. 2.

(3.) On the day of occurrence, P.W. 2 was engaged in some agricultural operations in their fields engaging coolies. AT about 7.30 A.M., all the accused came there. Accused 4 to 6 caught hold of the tuft of P.W. 2. and beat her. P.W. 1, father of P.W. 2, who had been present there, intervened and he was beaten with spade handle by accused 2 on his head. Accused 2 gave a hit on his left hip with the spade handle causing bleeding injury. Accused 3 beat him with stick. Accused 1 beat P.W. 2 also on her head with the spade handle. Accused 2 aimed a hit at P.W. 1 with the spade handle and P.W. 1 slided away and the hit so aimed fall accidentally on the hand of accused 1 causing him an injury on his head. Thereafter all the accused ran away from there.