ARIBAM CHHATRADHWAJA SHARMA Vs. NAMBAM LUHINDRA AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Criminal Revision Petition filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. to revise the judgment dated 12.1.1966 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Manipur, in Criminal Appeal 33/25 of 1965 allowing the same and acquitting the respondent and setting aside his conviction by the Judicial Magistrate -II in Criminal Case 22 of 1964 Under Section 447 I.P.C. and the sentence to pay a fine of Rs. 300 or in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 months.

(2.) P . W. 4 (A. Chhatradhwaja Sharma) the complainant filed Criminal Case 22 of 1964 before the Judicial Magistrate -11, Manipur Under Sections 447 and 506 I.P.C. against the respondent (Nambam Luhindro Singh alias Mohendra Singh) on 15.5.1964 alleging that he purchased an - "ingkhol" (residential site) covered by Patta No. 87/34 (old) corresponding to 87/213 (New). I.W.T. from P.W. 1 (Ningthouiam Sanaton Singh) under Ext. A/1, registered sale deed dated 31.7.1963 for Rs. 2,700, that P.W. 1 delivered possession of the site to P.W. 4. (the complainant) on the same day and that the latter had been in possession and enjoyment of the same. P.W. 4 further alleged in the complaint petition that in the morning of 14.5.1964, he went to the site to lay foundation to construct a house, that he found a wooden "Jatra" post erected by the respondent, that on enquiry P.W. 4 learnt from the respondent that the respondent erected the "Jatra" post, that the respondent refused to remove it and threatened to assault P.W. 4 and that, thus, the respondent is guilty of the offences Under Sections 447 and 506 I.P.C.

(3.) THE respondent carried the matter in appeal in Criminal Appeal 33/25 of 1965 on the file of the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge in Manipur. The latter held that there is a civil dispute between P.W. 1, the vendor and the respondent, that the dominant intention of the respondent was to take possession of the site by erecting a "Jatra" post, that intimidation, insult or annoyance were only the casual result and, that therefore, his conviction Under Section 447 I.P.C. is not sustainable. He, therefore, allowed? the appeal and set aside the conviction an sentence. Hence the present revision petition.