MANGILAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision by the petitioners Mangilal and Girdharlal against an order of the Sessions Judge, Balotra, dated 17th August, 1955, rejecting their application dated the 14th February, 3955, praying for their acquittal, and arises under the following circumstances,

(2.) THE petitioner Mangilal is a Sub Inspector of Police and the other petitioner Kirdharlal is a head constable of police and both were posted at the police station Balotra at the relevant time. THE case of the prosecution is that a report was filed by Purushottam and Kalu, residents of Ramdari, in the police station Balotra that a, theft had been committed in the house of Purshottam and that the complainant Punamchand filing with certain other persons were responsible for that theft. THEreupon the petitioner Mangilal sent for Punamchand, his mother, sister and sister's husband on the morning of the 7th April, 1950, and Insisted upon their appearance at the thana every day from the 8th April, 1950, to the 13th April, 1950 though they were allowed to go home at night. It was alleged that on the 13th April, 1950, the Sub Inspector Mangilal and head constable Girdharlal gave Punamchand a beating and tortured him by subjecting him to third degree methods. THE petitioner's mother, sister and sister's, husband are also alleged to have been beaten. It was further alleged that the Sub inspector Mangilal took possession of a certain Bahi of Punamchand and when the latter demanded it back, he was told by Mangilal that Punamchand should pay a sum of Rs, 300/- otherwise he (Mangilal) would; not give back the account-book. THE suggestion was (and this was later stated in so many words by Punamchand during his. statement in court) that the Sub Inspector Mangilal subjected him to all this torture with a view to extort a confession from him that he had committed the theft and to bring pressure upon to produce the stolen property and to extract money from him. This complaint was filed by Punamchand in the court of the District Magistrate, Bar-mer, on the 20th July, 1950. THE District Magistrate transferred it to the Sub Divisional Magistrate Barmer. THE latter made a preliminary inquiry under Section 202 Cr. P. C. and issued process against two of the accused persons, namely, Purshottam and Kalu, but passed no. orders so far as the present petitioners were concerned. THEreupon, Punamchand, the complainant, went in revision to the Sessions Judge, Balotra, who ordered a further inquiry. THEreafter the Sub Divisional Magistrate also registered a case against the present petitioners under Sections 323 and 504, I, P. C. & issued processes against both of them on the 23rd August, 1951. It appears that the petitioners evaded service for a long time and Sub Inspector Mangilal was served on the 4th, September, 1953, and Girdharlal was served some time in January, 1954.