ALLAHNOOR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Sri N.I. Jafri, learned counsel for the appellant on admission of the present appeal, which has been filed under section 372 Cr.P.C. to challenge the correctness of findings recorded by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No. 16, Muzaffarnagar in Sessions Trial No. 1003 of 2002, so as to acquitting the respondents of charges under Sections 307, 323, 324, 427, 506 IPC.

(2.) The allegations were contained in the written report filed by Allahnoor, the appellant, in which it was stated that in spite of the consolidation proceedings having been completed, the possession to the allottees had not been delivered, but in spite of that the respondents who were quarrel-some persons were attempting to take forcible possession of lands belonging to the informant two months prior to the exact date of delivery of possession. In consequence thereto, it so happened on 12.02.2001 at about 1:00 P.M. that the respondents started harvesting the wheat crop grown by the informant, which was objected to by Baledeen, Liyaqat and Smt. Hushna Bano upon which the respondents threatened them of dire consequences and on the remonstration to kill them, respondent-Iliyas is said to have given a tabal (it is farsa, a heavy sharp-cutting weapon) on the head of Baledeen. Murshad is said to have given a blow with the same weapon upon the head of Liyaqat, while Rashid dealt another blow with Balkatti, another heavy sharp-cutting weapon, to both Liyaqat and Baledeen. The respondent Irfan@ Bhoori dealt blow with his lathi on the three injured, namely, Baledeen, Liyaqat and Smt. Hushna Bano. Witnesses, who were present there, intervened and saved the injured, who retreated from the place of occurrence holding threats to the injured.

(3.) The informant stated that the condition of the injured was serious and he remained very much engaged in arranging for their treatment and looking after them. As such, there was some delay in lodging the report.