LAWS(ALL)-1952-2-34

GAURI SHANKAR Vs. STATE

Decided On February 20, 1952
GAURI SHANKAR Appellant
V/S
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application in revision filed by Gauri Shankar and Sri Ram, residents of Sarawan and Bhanpur respectively, Police Station Tarabganj, District Gonda, against the order of the Temporary (Additional) Sessions Judge, Gonda confirming the order of Sri J. P. Govil, S. D. M., Tarabganj, Gonda binding them down to be of good ' behaviour for a period of one year under Section 110, Criminal P. C., on account of their being by habit house-breakers and thieves and so desperate and dangerous as to render their being at large without security hazardous to the community. It may be mentioned that along with the two applicants named above there were two other persons against whom proceedings under Section 110 were instituted by the police. Their names are Jaipattar and Kalapanth, residents of village Sarawan. All the four persons were bound down by the order of the trial Court. An appeal was filed against the said order to the lower Court. The appeal of all the aforesaid persons was dismissed. The case has been argued before me on behalf of the two applicants who have filed this revision. I am informed by the office that the remaining two persons proceeded against have not filed any revision.

(2.) The proceedings in the present case were instituted by the police. The prosecution examined 37 witnesses to prove its case. On behalf of the defence in rebuttal (sic). In order to be able to appraise the relative value of the prosecution and the defence evidence, it is necessary to mention some preliminary facts which are admitted in the prosecution evidence.

(3.) It has come out in the prosecution evidence itself that there were two parties in the locality. One party was headed by a person named Siddhu Singh and the other was headed by the applicants. Most of the prosecution witnesses have some connection or other with Siddhu's party. The fact that there were two rival parties as mentioned above is admitted by P. Ws. 30 and 36. P. W. 36 goes to the length of saying that Siddhu Singh and Gomti Singh and Naresh Singh of Siddhu's party obtained his signature on a paper and compelled him to undertake to appear as a witness failing which he would be turned out of the village.