AWADH SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants Nos. 1 to 5 and 8 have been convicted under Sections 148 and 326/149, Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each under the former section and for seven years each under the other sections. The appellants Nos. 1 to 3 have also been convicted under Section 324, Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each under that section. The sentences are to run concurrently. The appellants Nos. 6 and 7 have been convicted under Sections 148 and 326/149, Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years each under Sections 326/149, Penal Code, but no separate sentence has been passed under Section 148, Penal Code. The appellant No. 9 has been convicted under Sections 147 and 326/149, Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years under Sections 328/149, Penal Code, but no separate sentence has been passed under Section 147, Penal Code.

(2.) The prosecution case is as follows. Dhangawan 'pyne alias' Darbasain 'pyne' starts about 8 or 9 chains south of the injunction of three villages, namely, Marsua, Morasa and Asiawan, and after passing through several villages towards the north terminates in village Dhargawan. The surplus water of adjacent fields known as Nigar is discharged into the mouth of this 'pyne'. The residents of Dhangawan and neighbouring villages are alone entitled to the water discharged in this 'pyne', and admittedly the residents of Asiawan. Morasa and Marsua have no right to irrigate their fields from it. On 23-9-1951, at 8 a.m. about 50 persons, residents of village Dhangawan and the neighbouring villages started desilting the pyne just from the northern side of the road-pyne. After they had desilted at places where it was found necessary to desilt and had proceeded about 175 places north of the crossing they heard people shouting towards the south and they saw a mob numbering 50 or 60 armed with various weapons approaching towards them. At this Jamuna Singh (P. W. 1) who was supervising the work told his men to leave digging, whereupon they left the work and shifted to an adjacent 'marua' field towards the east of the 'pyne'. The armed mob reached near the place where these persons were and the appellant Awadh Singh asked Jamuna Singh to stop digging. The latter asserted his right, and thereupon the appellant ordered assault. The mob thereafter began to assault. The appellants Awadh Singh, Raideo Singh and Keshwar Mahton struck Kamjit with garassas and the appellants Awadh Singh, Raideo Singh and Deonandan Mahton struck Jamuna Singh (P. W. 1) with garassas. The appellants Sheoratan Singh also gave a garassa blow to Baldeo Singh (P. W. 6). Keshwar Mahton (P. W. 4), Ramkishun (P. W. 10). Chandraman CP. W. 11) and Karu Singh (P. W. 15) also received injuries in the scuffle. Several other persons who, being frightened, took to their heels, were also chased and assaulted by the members of the mob. After the mob left the place, the prosecution party arranged for cots and bearers and took the injured persons to the nearest police station at Jehanabad which is at a distance of six miles from the place of occurrence and first information was lodged by Bhagwat Singh (P. W. 24) at 2 P. M. on the same day. After recording the first information and preparing the injury reports, the investigating officer sent the injured persons to the hospital where Ramjit died. On receipt of this information the investigating officer reached the hospital at about 3 P. M. and having prepared an inquest report forwarded the dead body of Ramjit for 'post mortem' examination. After investigation the police submitted charge-sheet against the appellants along with three other persons, namely Ruplal alias Saroop, Bhausagar and Mahabir. On preliminary enquiry having been held they were committed to the Court of session for trial.

(3.) The defence of the accused persons was that they were innocent and that they had not gone to the place of occurrence at all. They also asserted that none of the prosecution witnesses knew them either by name or by face. Their case is that the prosecution party wanted to dig a parti plot bearing No. 431 which starts from the injunction of the three villages and proceeds to the Morasa 'pyne' and that there was some scuffle between the men of the prosecution party and some people of villages Morasa and Anandibigha and they suggested that the injuries might have been caused in that scuffle.