(1.) THIS is a revision against the appellate judgment of the Assistant Sessions Judge of Balasore maintaining the conviction of the three petitioners under section 379 I.P.C. and the sentence of fine passed on them by the Second class Magistrate of Balasore. At the time of the admission of this revision petition, a Rule was issued on the petitioners to show cause why the sentence may not be enhanced to a substantive sentence of imprisonment, and they were given an opportunity of showing cause against their conviction as well.
(2.) THE prosecution case was that plots Nos. 739 and 740 of village Jhadipipal P. S. Bhograi, in Balasore district, were in possession of one Lakhmi Narayan Patro (P. W. 3) and his joint brother Ramkrushna Patro, and that Lakhminarayan had raised paddy crops on the same during the cultivation season of 1959. The petitioners had previous disputes with him in respect of some other plots which had resulted in a proceeding under Section 145 Criminal Procedure Code which terminated in favour of Lakhmi Narayan Patro. On account of this previous enmity the petitioners were alleged to have gone on the disputed fields at about 4.30 a.m. on 25 -11 -59 accompanied by about 200 persons and to have harvested the paddy crops even though they were not fully ripe. Their action was noticed by one Naktodi Giri (P. W. 1) who immediately ran to Lakhmi Narayan and informed him about the incident. Soon afterwards a Police Constable of Bhograi, namely Panchanan Das (P. W. 7) who was then on patrol duty in that area happened to pass that area and Lakhminarayan immediately told him about the high -handed action of the petitioners. The Constable thought that he could prevent the commission of the offence and hence he went to the spot at once, without sufficient men to help him, and asked the petitioners to stop harvesting the paddy but they would not listen; and when he insisted on their desisting from harvesting petitioners Anadi Giri and Kali Giri were alleged to have caused him injuries with their lathis, and petitioner Banamali Giri also chased him and threatened to assault him. Finding that a big mob had collected at the place the Constable ran away and then lodged a station diary entry at Nampoo Police Outpost on 25 -11 -59 (See Ext. 3 station diary entry No. 231) on the basis of which a regular F.I.R. was subsequently drawn up and the case was investigated. The Constable (P.W. 7) was also medically examined by Dr. B. K. Basu (P. W. 6) who found bruise and swelling on his body. The injuries were simple and were said to have been caused by a hard and blunt weapon.
(3.) AS regards the actual incident - which was alleged to have taken place at about 4.30 a.m. during the night of the 24th -25th November 1959 the most important witness is undoubtedly the Police Constable (P. W. 7). He has spoken about his being informed by Lakhminarayan about the harvesting of the crops by the petitioners, his going to the spot and seeing the mob collected there, and the assault on him while he asked the petitioners to desist from cutting the paddy. The medical evidence also shows that he was injured in the attack. Though it was argued with great vehemence that the Constable should not be believed because he was under the clutches of Lakhminarayan Patro who is a very rich man and influential man of the locality, nevertheless I see absolutely no reason why the evidence of this public servant should not be accepted as regards the actual occurrence.