RUDRA NATH MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has been filed against the acquittal of opposite parties Ram Singhasan Thakur, Ram Sunder Thakur, Ram Chander Thakur and Girish Chandra in a complaint case under Section 323, I.P.C.

(2.) I have heard learned Counsel for the parties and have gone through the record. The complaint lodged in the Court of the Munsif Magistrate, Ballio by the complainant Rudra Nath Misra Indicates that on the date of the occurrence, namely, 24.7.1977 at about 6.00 p.m. the tractor of the complainant was passing on the chak road and when It reached near the field of Ram Singhasan, Ram Singhasan protested that the tractor was encroaching upon his cultivated land. He stopped the tractor and raised an alarm and the other three Respondents, namely. Ram Sunder, Ram Chander and Girish Chandra came to his help. The Respondents No. 2 to 5 abused the complainant party and one of them, namely Girish Chandra gave slaps on the face of Sahabuddin who was cleaner of the tractor. in support of the complaint, the complainant examined four witnesses, namely. Rudra Nath Misra, P.W. 1. Sahabuddin, P.W. 2, Kedar Nath, P.W. 3 and Mardav Misra, P.W. 4. Learned Munsif Magistrate after considering the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the presence and participation of the Respondents Ram Sunder, Ram Chander and Girish Chandra in this occurrence is doubtful and Respondent Ram Singh, had a right to resist the encroachment by the tractor of the complainant and if he gave a few slaps on the face of the cleaner of the tractor, no offence was committed.

(3.) After perusal of the statement of the witnesses produced by the complainant I have no hesitation in saying that the Munsif Magistrate has properly appreciated the evidence on record and has come to a correct conclusion that the complainant has failed to prove the commission of offence under Section 323, I.P.C. by Respondents No. 2 to 5. There is no force in this appeal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.