GOLAP ALI Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Of the nine appellants in this appeal, Keamaddi has been found guilty under Section 148, I.P. C, and sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment and also under Section 304(part 2) and sentenced to seven years rigorous imprisonment, the sentences to run concurrently; Mohan and Manik Sheikh were each sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment under Section 148, I.P. C, and to six years under Section 304, (part 2) 149, I.P. C, the sentences to run concurrently. Manik was further convicted under Section 324, I.P.C. The other appellants Golapdi, Bonomali, Hasenuddi, Gadu, Anasaraddi and Ahmad Ali were convicted under Section 147 and sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment; they were also convicted under Section 304(para2) 149 and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment, the sentences to run concurrently. The verdict of the jury with which the learned Judge agreed was unanimous.

(2.) The prosecution case is that the complainant Kuti Matbar and his nephews Hamid and Imanaddi (deceased) went with their ploughs to plough Hamijaddi's khet which lies to the south of the khet of the appellant Golapdi. There had been ill-feeling between the two parties on various grounds amongst others on account of a dispute over the ail between Hamijuddi's khet and Golapdi's khet to the north. The prosecution allege that at the time of the occurrence the appellants and others came armed with katras, shorkis and lathis and attacked the complainant and those who were with them while they were ploughing Hamijudd's khet. Golapdi and his two sons Kuti Mea and Bonomali came first to the field. Kuti had a katra in his hand and Golapdi and Bonornali each had a lathi. Shortly afterwards some more men numbering about 20 arrived there. Of these men Manik had a san dao in his hand and Mobarak (who is not on trial) and Mohan each had a katra and the rest had lathis. Seeing the armed men coming the complainant Kuti Matbarand Hamid started running away towards the west and began to shout. Imanaddi was not quick in getting away,land was surrounded and assaulted by Golapdi's order to beat him. Ansaraddi gave him a lathi blow which Imanaddi warded off with his left hand, but afterwards Kuti Mea stabbed Imanaddi with a katra piercing the right side of his abdomen while Manik struck him on his left shoulder with a san dao. Imanaddi fell down and died immediately. Then there was a cry of murder and the accused's party went away to the north. Subsequently, the accused were arrested and put on their trial on the charges with which they have been convicted.

(3.) The principal point urged in this appeal is that the learned Judge misdirected the jury inasmuch as he told them that as no right of private defence of property is claimed on behalf of the accused the jury need not consider if such a right existed at all. He also said: I think in the circumstances appearing in the evidence right of private defence of property could not be claimed in the case and the defence pleader has rightly disclaimed it on behalf of the accused.