ABDUL QADIR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant Abdul Quadir has been found guilty for the offence punishable under S. 302 of the Penal Code and appellants Ataullah and Md Mazlum have been found guilty for the offence punishable under S. 302 read with S. 34 of the Penal Code and each has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. All the appellants have been found guilty for the offence "punishable under Ss.147 and 379 of the Penal Code and each has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under each count. Appellants Lal Mohammed, Neyamat Main, Makul and Ali Hassan have further been found guilty for the offence punishable under S. 323 of the Penal Code and each has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. However, the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) The prosecution case, briefly stated, is that at about 9 A.M. on 24-7-1972 Md. Usman (P. W. 8), who is also the informant of this case and who happened to be the son of deceased Chuman Mian resident of village Chakla Nirmali, P. S. Supaul, was ploughing his field which was situated towards south of the village. Chuman was, at that time, standing on a ridge. Suleman (P.W. 7) was at his house. At that time, the appellants armed with lathis and sickles came to the informants' field and started cutting Bhadai paddy. In the meantime, Suleman (P. W. 7) also arrived at the place of occurrence. Usman (informant), his father Chuman and his brother Suleman protested. On this protest, appellant Quadir Mian gave a lathi blow on the right Kanpatti of Chuman Mian, who fell down and, thereafter, appellants Mazlum and Ataullah assaulted him with lathis. Suleman wanted to save his father whereupon he was also assaulted by appellant Lal Mohammad, Neamat Mian Maqbool Mian and Ali Hassan Mian. Hulla was raised and many persons came and witnessed the occurrence. On Hulla, the accused persons fled away after taking the harvested Bhadai crops. Chuman and Suleman were taken to the hospital, but Chuman died on the way. The Sub- Inspector of Police of Supaul police station recorded the Fardbeyan of Md. Osman in the Supaul Hospital.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants has mainly' confined his argument on the appreciation of evidence ant! specially it has been put forward that, as a matter of fact, the disputed land belonged to the appellants and that being so, if at all any assault had been committed, that has been done in exercise of the right of private defence of the property.