CHUNNI LAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application in revision against an order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Budaun, confirming an order of a learned Magistrate of the first class, convicting Shri Chuni Lal of an offence under Section 182, Penal Code, and sentencing him to a fine of Rs. 200 or in the alternative one month's simple imprisonment.

(2.) The facts which have given rise to this application in revision are of a fairly simple nature. The applicant is a resident of village Mundia, P.S. Bisauli in the Badaun district. This village is a Town Area and it has a Town Area Committee, the election of which was to be held on 25.9.1948. The applicant was a candidate for the Chairmanship of the Committee. On the date in question members of the Town Area Committee were to be elected as also the Chairman. The applicant was being opposed by a gentleman, called Narendra Deo. It would further appear that on the date in question Section 144, Criminal P. C., was in force, orders under that section having been issued by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Shri J.N. Goel. Finding that he was getting defeated, the applicant went and made two applications, one to the Sub-Divisional Officer and the other to the Station Officer, Bisauli. They are Exs. 2 and 3 and they form the basis of the charge against him. In these applications he made wild allegations against the manner in which the election was being run on behalf of his rival candidate. He stated in these applications that the friends and supporters of Shri Narendra Deo were going about the village freely armed with lathis and weapons and holding out threats to the voters not to vote for the applicant. He further said that there was every apprehension of a breach of the peace, that the police had been doing nothing to avert it and that finding that a breach of the peace was imminent, he had come away to make a report. Allegations were further made by him that Narendra Deo and his supporters had been terrorising voters and holding out threats that they would not be allowed to live in the village, should they vote for the applicant and that in point of fact voters had been dragged out of their houses and not allowed to go to the polling booth to vote for him. A further allegation which was made by him was that in actual fact the kurta of a person called Sukhdarshan Lal had been torn off. Actually 12 persons were specifically named by him as being responsible for the criminal activities referred to above.

(3.) On an inquiry into these allegations, it was discovered by the Sub-Divisional Officer that the complaint was of an absolutely false nature. The learned Sessions Judge has carefully reviewed the evidence in regard to the truth or otherwise of the complaint and he has come to the conclusion that there was no basis for the report made by him. On these findings, the learned Sessions Judge arrived at the conclusion that the applicant was guilty of an offence under Section 182, Penal Code.