SIV NARAIN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Addl. Sessions Judge, Baran in Sessions Case No. 64/74 convicted the accused -appellants under Section 326, 326/34 324 and 324/34, IPC and sentenced them to various terms of imprisonment as mentioned in his judgment. Aggrieved by this order of conviction the present appellants have filed this appeal.

(2.) THE brief facts giving rise to this appeal are that there was a dispute between the complainant party on the one hand and the accused party on the other in respect of possession of the field bearing Khasra numbers 1471 and 1474 situated in village Patunda. The above fields are known by the name of Hirapuri. Attached to this land in the northern side there is a small piece of another land which is known as Kankar. A part of this Kankar land is said to have been in possession of the complainant party. On 3 -7 -1973 the complainant party sent three Halies in the morning to plough the above land known as Hirapuri. The accused persons did not allow the Halies to plough the land. The Halies returned back and informed the complainant party about the refusal by the accused persons in ploughing the fields. In the same after -noon the complainant party consisting of three brothers, Shantilal, Sankal Chand and Bansilal went to the above field along with the above three Halies, namely Mathuralal, Ganeshram and Chotulal. It is alleged .that the accused persons also arrived at the field duly armed with guns and Kutiyas. When the complainant party wanted to plough the disputed land, it is alleged that the accused persons started assaulting the complainant party. The accused Pushpa Dayal alias Ramdayal is alleged to have aimed the gun at PW 1 Shantiilal and pressed strigger but the gun did not come of on account of lack of ignition, because the gun was a muzzle loading gun. It has been further alleged that the accused persons caused injuries to Shantilal, Sankalchand and Bansilal by Kutiyas. The injuries received by Sankalchand were found to be caused by sharp edged weapon and one of the injuries was grievous in nature being fracture of the skull bone on right side of frontal and parietal bones. The injuries received by other two brothers were found to be simple in nature caused by both sharp and blunt weapons.

(3.) THE accused appellants denied the charges and claimed trial. 16 witnesses in all have been produced from the side of the prosecution Statements of the accused persons under Section 313, Cr.PC were recorded, who denied the allegations levelled against them, and it was stated by them that the field in dispute was in their possession and the complainant party wanted to dispossess them and in doing so the complainant party gave beating to the accused persons. The accused persons also sustained injuries. It has been further stated by the accused persons that a revenue suit was filed by the complainant party, wherein their request for temporary injunction was rejected, and it was observed by the revenue court that the land in dispute is in possession of the accused party. It has been further stated by the accused persons that in the light of the aforesaid circumstances a right of private defence of property and person had accrued to them.