HORI LAL Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sarvsri Bhola Nath, Komal Prasad, Chhotey Lal, Kallu Ram and Mangli were real brothers and residents in village Dhankuni in the district of Pilibhit. Bhola Nath possessed about 18 bighas of agricultural land. He died leaving his only son Chheda Lal as his heir when Chheda Lal was a minor aged about 12 years. Chheda Lal was mentally infirm. Chhotey Lal his uncle looked after his person and property including the agricultural land as his guardian after the death of his father and had cultivated sugar cane crop in a chak of six bighas in the year 1976. Chheda Lal separated himself from the guardianship of Chhotey Lal a few days before the occurrence of this case and began to reside with his first cousin Jiwan Lal (P.W. 5) son of Kallu Ram. Narain (P.W. 1) is also a first cousin of Chheda Lal being the son of Komal Prasad deceased. Narain (P.W. 1) and Jiwan Lal (P.W. 5) were cutting the aforesaid sugar cane crop on 21st of March 1976. Chheda Lal was also present there. The accused appellant Hon Lal aged about 22 years armed with a kassi reached there along with his father Chhotey Lal at about 9 A.M. Chhotey Lal was armed with a lathi. Both began to abuse Narain (PW. 1) and Jiwan Lal (P.W. 5) and assaulted them causing two lacerated wounds to each. Thereafter Hon Lal and his father left the place. Narain (P.W. 1) and, Jiwan Lal (P.W. 5) reached their home after about 15 minutes of this occurrence and there again Hon Lal appellant and Chhotey Lal attacked them. Narain (PW.1) was armed with a danda. He began to ply the danda causing injury to Chhotey Lal, just then Komal Prasad the father of Narain (P.W. 1) reached there to save him. Hon Lal dealt a lathi blow on his head. He fell down and became unconscious. Narain carried his father to the Police Station and lodged F.I.R. there at 12.10 P.M. on the same date. Komal Prasad was examined by Dr. A. Kumar, Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre, Neoria, at 4 P.M., and found one lacerated wound 5 cm x 1 cm. x 1.5 cm on the left side of head 8 cm above the left ear. Komal Prasad succumbed to the injures on the same night at 11.30 P.M. in the District Hospital, Pilibhit. Han Ram Sharma (P.W. 6) investigated the case and submitted charge-sheet against Chhotey Lal and Hon Lal. The prosecution examined Narain (P.W. 1), Pope Ram (P.W.4) and Jiwan Lal (P.W. 5) as witnesses of fact over and above five other witnesses. The learned Sessions Judge, on a consideration of entire evidence arrived at the conclusion that the accused did not commit any offence by causing injuries to Narain (P.W. 1) and Jiwan Lal (P.W. 5) at the sugar cane crop field. He, however, arrived at the conclusion that the occurrence which took place subsequently at the house of the accused was a free fight among four persons, to wit the two accused on one side and the two P.Ws. Nos. 1 and 5 on the other side and in that fight the accused Hon Lal appellant caused fatal injury to Komal Prasad and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 304 I.P.C. He has, therefore, acquitted Chhotey Lal but convicted the accused appellant Hon Lal under Section 304 I.P.G and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for a period of seven years. He has felt aggrieved and come up in appeal.

(2.) I have heard learned counsel for both the parties and have gone through the evidence on record with care.

(3.) It is in evidence that Chheda Lal, son of Bhola Nath, was a minor suffering from mental infirmity when his father died leaving him and his property under the guardianship of Chhotey Lal. It is also in evidence that since the death of Bhola Nath till a few days before the occurrence of this case, Chheda Lal as well as his property was being looked after by Chhotey Lal. It is further proved that Chhotey Lal cultivated sugar Cane crop in the chak of six bighas which belonged to Chheda Lal. Under these circumstances the learned Sessions Judge has rightly held that Chhotey Lal was in possession of the crop and as such the accused did not commit any offence when they caused injuries to Narain (P.W. 1) and Jiwan Lal (P.W. 5) who were cutting the aforesaid crop. It is also proved that in the incident which took place at the sugarcane crop field the accused Hon Lal and Chhotey Lal did not receive any injury. Narain (P.W. 1) and Jiwan Lal (P.W. 5) did receive two lacerated wounds each, in that incident.