EMPEROR Vs. BARKA JETHA MAJHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Additional Sessions Judge of Purnea by his judgment dated 16th June 1941, recommends under Section 374, Criminal P.C., that Barka Jetha Majhi should be sentenced to death under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. By the same order Barka Jetha was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years under Section 326, Indian Penal Code, and further to three years rigorous 1 imprisonment under Section 148, Indian Penal Code, the latter sentences to run concurrently. The convict has also filed an appeal. The same trial resulted in the conviction of a number of other persons who were jointly tried with Barka Jetha, but out of them only Langra Manjhi and Bhaga alias Baghrai Manjhi have appealed against their convictions and sentences under Secs.326 and 148, Indian Penal Code, the sentences being five years rigorous imprisonment under Section 326, Penal Code, and three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 148, Indian Penal Code, the sentences are to run concurrently. These appeals will be disposed of along with the death reference.

(2.) The case of the prosecution briefly stated is that Jialal Jadav aged 75 is a tenure-holder of about 600 bighas of cultivable land in village Jianganj which is about six miles off to the east of Dharhara police station. These lands are cultivated in some seasons and not cultivable in other seasons. In this village there is a Santal Toli from which the accused persons come. Some of these Santals were given lands in batai by Jialal but the evidence suggests that he was careful to change the settlement from time to time obviously in order to prevent the accrual of occupancy rights. As is also usual in such cases the bataidars were neither given any paper in evidence of their settlement nor did their landlord issue any receipts to show the actual division of the crops in any particular year. From some time before April 1940, there was a general movement among the Santal residents in police station Dharhara and other neighbouring thanas in order to have their rights over the batai lands placed on a satisfactory basis. The authorities being apprehensive of a serious agrarian trouble tried to bring about a settlement between the parties. Exhibit 7 dated 9 April 1940, is a notice printed and circulated by the then District Magistrate and gives some account of this dispute. It appears to have been agreed at the intervention of the authorities that the bataidars should enter into written kabuliats and that the tenure-holders should henceforth give them regular receipts. As a preliminary, lists had to be made of the lands which the landlords admitted were in batai and which the bataidars claimed to be in their cultivating possession. This naturally led to a tension between the parties because the tenure-holders on the one hand would try to exaggerate the extent of their khas possession and the bataidars on the other hand were equally concerned to exaggerate their claim to the lands held as batai. The petition of complaint, Ex. 31, shows that the agrarian dispute had spread itself into criminal Courts. On 16 April 1940, Shyam Sunder Jadav of village Jianganj lodged a complaint to the effect that after the service of the notice by the order of the Collector on the tenure-holders, raiyats, and bataidars a large body of Santals about 100 to 125 in number accompanied with labourers formed an unlawful assembly being armed with arrows, dhanus and lathis and forcibly removed from the threshing floor the entire crops which was to have been divided between the bataidars and the landlords. On 18 April 1940, the Magistrate who received the complaint took a correct view of the situation when he stated in his order, Ex. 33 (1), that a state of lawlessness then existed as the result of the agrarian trouble in this thana area and unless immediate action was taken there would be serious trouble. He accordingly issued warrants of arrest against the accused named in the petition of complaint under Secs.144, 447 and 379, Indian Penal Code. The Santal accused appeared in Court on 31 May 1940 when the case was made over to Mr. D.D. Banerji for favour of disposal. That officer summoned the prosecution witnesses for 4 July 1940. Before that date the present occurrence took place on 10 June 1940.

(3.) Jialal Jadav claims to have given about 30 bighas of land in village Jianganj in batai system to Nebi Gope of that village. That bataidar went to sow maize on the morning of 10 June when a number of Santals turned up armed with arrows and lathis and prevented Nebi Gope from ploughing the land as they claimed the land to be their own batai. At this Nebi Gope raised an outcry whereupon, it is said, Meghu Gope, Rabi Gope, Maya Lai and Baldeo residents of the same village came up running and began to remonstrate with the Santals who had proceeded to unyoke the bullocks of Nebi. This led to a dispute and mutual assaults, the details of which will be examined later. At this stage, so is the case of the prosecution, the Santals receded for some distance and from there began to shoot at the Goalas and their adherents with arrows which they were carrying. The result of this as sault was that two men on the side of the Goalas were killed on the spot. Rabi Gope received an arrow which went right through his lungs and through his diaphragm. It may be that Rabi Gope tottered a short distance. His dead body was lying about 100 yards from where there were signs of two ploughs being used by the Goalas. Meghu Gope also fell after tottering a short distance as the result of an arrow shot. He was found lying about ten paces to the west of Rabi. Nebi Gope also received serious arrow wound. The arrow went into his thorax below the chest the arrow stem had to be cut out and the arrow head with part of the stem had to be extracted by making a puncture on the opposite side. Nebi Gope was in a serious condition. Mr. R.K. Dutta, the medical officer in charge of the Baradih Dispensary was requisitioned to go to Jianganj, which is one mile away, where he reached at 11 a. m. He says that he extracted the arrow from the body of Nebi which had gone into the left side of his abdomen below the left costal margin. He bandaged the wound and sent him off to Purnea. At that time Nebi's condition was good but he was in pain and had fainted when the arrow was extracted. Towards the evening however, the condition of Nebi became serious and an attempt was made to record his dying declaration at 10-30 p.m. on that day. Nebi Gope made a short incomplete statement which is Ex. 1 in the case. He died after 10 days. Three other persons were found to have injuries on the side of the Goalas. Maya Lai Mandal had received minor lathi injuries. Baldeo Mandal had a lacerated injury and one Chhabi Das is said to have received lacerated injury and a bruise.