RAM SUHAWAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Government Advocate has received notice. Both the counsels for the applicant and the State are agreed that the revision be finally decided today.

(2.) THE applicant has been convicted under Section 324 IPC. He was sentenced to one years' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 200/- by the Trial Court. THE appellate court has reduced the sentence of imprisonment to six months' R. I. and fine to Rs. 100/-

(3.) THE contention not only has no merit but is fallacious because even if there was some misunderstanding about the extent of the respective portions, the dispute should have been got settled through Civil Court ; the accused could not himself take the decision about his rights and take the law in his own hand. Claim of a right to property is not enough to give any person the right to cause injury to another claimant. In such a case the right to defend cannot include the right to offend. Every drop of human blood is more precious than a claim to acres of land. THE applicant -could not for the purpose of enforcing his claim to property strike a spear blow in the abdomen of his rival. Law does not protect such an action. THE conviction of the applicant, cannot, therefore be held to suffer from any error.