BHOLA PRASAD CHAUDHARY Vs. GURU PRASAD SAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners were convicted by a Magistrate of Sahibganj under Section 342 of the Penal Code; petitioner No. 1 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for nine months and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months; petitioner No. 2 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months and petitioner No. 3 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month only. On appeal by the petitioners, their convictions and sentences were upheld by the Sessions Judge of the Santal Parganas.

(2.) The facts as found by the courts below are these. Petitioner Bhola Prasad Chaudhary is the Sarpanch and petitioner Charan Napit is the Chief Officer of the village volunteer force of Rakshi Gram Panchayat constituted under the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act, 1947. Petitioner Abdul Jabbar is the chaukidar of village Raksi. On Wednesday the 22nd October 1958 at about 8 a.m. petitioners Bhola Chaudhary and Jabbar went to the house of opposite party Guru Prasad Sah and asked him to go to the house of the Mukhiya of the Gram Panchayat. As Guru Prasad was taking meal then he promised to go to the Mukhiya's house later. After some time Guru Prasad went to the Mukhiya's house, but there his waist was tied by the Chaukidar with a gamchha under the order of the Sarpanch and they took Guru Prasad to village Barhait, a distance of two miles, to the house of Tribeni Prasad (P. W. 1), a Samdhi of the Sarpanch. Guru Prasad was kept confined by them in the house of Tribeni from 10 a.m. to 10 P. M. Then he was brought to the house of Sarpanch and the Chief Officer Charan Napit handcuffed him and then he was detained in the house of the Sarpanch for the whole night.

(3.) The petitioners pleaded innocense and said that the chief officer and the chaukidar acted in good faith under the orders of the Sarpanch and the Sarpanch himself acted in discharge of his duties under Section 64 of the Bihar Panchayat Raj Act. Hence, a question arose whether cognizance could toe taken on receipt of a complaint without previous sanction of the State Government.