RAMCHANDRA TURAH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the 6th of September, 1900 at about 5 a. m. the complainant Sahedeo Sah, according to his case, found petitioners 1 to 3 harvesting and looting Sanai Crop from his field bearing plot No. 20, khata No. 76 in village Chakayee, police station Manjhi in the district of Saran. The complainant caught hold of petitioner No. 3 but petitioners 1 and 2 succeeded in making good their escape. While the complainant was taking petitioner No. 3 to the police station, in the way, it is alleged, petitioners 1 and 2 came along with petitioners 4 to 8 and asked the complainant to release petitioner No. 3. They came armed with lathis and bhalas. On his refusal to do so, the said seven petitioners forcibly rescued petitioner No. 8 from the custody and arrest of the complainant. The price of the Sanai crops said to have been looted by some of the petitioners was stated to be Rs. 46. On these allegations, Sahdeo filed a complaint on 7-9-60 before Manjhi-Chainpur Gram Cutcherry. The Gram Cutcherry took cognizance of the case as one for trial of an offence under Section 379 of the Penal Code. After taking evidence in the case, by its order dated 25-10-61 (Ext. F), it acquitted all the petitioners of the charge of that under Section 379 of the Penal Code. Three days later the complainant filed a complaint petition in the court of the Sub-divisional Magistrate of Chapra making the same allegations which had been made in the complaint filed before the Gram Cutcherry. Fresh cognizance of this case was taken, and eventually the petitioners were tried by the Munsif-Magistrate who, by his order dated 20-12-62, found all the petitioners guilty under Section 379 of the Penal Code and sentenced each of them to pay a fine of Rs. 51 in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. The seven petitioners other than petitioner No. 3 have also been convicted under Section 225 of the Penal Code and each has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months All these petitioners have further been convicted for the offence of rioting also--those armed with deadly weapons, namely, petitioners, 1, 2, and 6 under Section 148 with imposition of a sentence of one month's rigorous imprisonment on each and those armed with lathis, namely, petitioners 4, 5, 7 and 8 under Section 147 and each of them has been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 51, in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one month. The sentences have been directed to run consecutively.

(2.) On appeal by the petitioners, the learned Additional Sessions Judge of Saran has affirmed the conviction of, and the sentences imposed upon, the petitioners by the trial court.

(3.) The substantial point of law which was urged before the learned Additional Sessions Judge and which is the only point urged in this court is whether the trial of the petitioners for the offence under Section 379 of the Penal Code was barred under Section 403(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, hereinafter called the 'Code' And, there being an order of acquittal in their favour recorded by the Gram Cutcherry. The Munsif-Magistrate had no jurisdiction to record a contrary finding in regard to the offence under Section 379; that being so none of the petitioners could be convicted either for the offence of rioting that under Section 225 of the Penal Code as it must be held that the arrest of petitioner No. 3 by the complainant was not lawful.