GANAPATHI SARMA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have been convicted of having taken part in a riot and committed various offences in the course of the riot. The riot took place at Karur on the night of 24 August 1921 and early morning of 25 August 1921, and was occasioned, as found by the lower Courts, by an attempt on the part of the Congress arid Khilafat Committees there to compel the manager of a theatrical troupe performing at the theatre at Karur to hand over to the funds of these Committees his takings for one night's performance. Annoyed at in refusal, the crowd who had accompanied the Secretaries of these Committees attacked the theatre while the performance was going on, stampeded the audience and committed various acts of violence to the persons in the audience and the property of the troupe. The Trying Court has written a careful and discriminating judgment, in which the main facts of the riot are very clearly set out.

(2.) The chief incidents of the night are detailed in order in paragraph 83 and following paragraphs of the Trying Court's judgment. The particular offences of which the crowd, generally, has been found guilty are endangering human life by throwing stones ( Section 336, Indian Penal Code), causing hurt by the same ( Section 337), causing hurt to Police Officers ( Section 332), wrongful restraint ( Section 341), mischief ( Section 426) and criminal trespass ( Section 447). The lower Courts have found the petitioners guilty of all these offences either directly or contsructively by force of Secs.34 and 149, Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The riot began at 8-30 P.M. and went on spasmodically till 9-30 the next morning. Between 11-30 P.M., when the Police fired and one of the mob was killed, until 6-30 A.M., there appears to have been a decided lull in the activities of the mob. Prior to 11-30 P. M., however, all the offences of which the mob as a whole were found guilty of had been perpetrated, although again at 6-30 A. M. there was a renewal of the offences under Sections 426 and 447, and further offences under Section 435 by isolated members of the crowd. That the actions of the mob between 8-30 and 11-30 P.M. were united and concerted and continuous admits of no doubt; and for whatever criminal offences it committed or was likely to commit in furtherance of its common object during that period, each member of the assembly would in law be responsible. As to the renewal of activities at 6-30 A.M. before individual members of the original mob could be held in law responsible for those acts, it would have to be clearly shown either that they were present during the second riot or that the second riot was a continuation of, and a likely result of the first.