SHUKUL Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellants in this case are 31 in number. They have been tried in the Sessions Judge's Court of Benares for offences under Secs.148, 302/149 and 307/149 and 147, Indian Penal Code. Gokul, Nazir Pancham, Sumer, Shukul and Tika have been convicted of rioting armed with a deadly weapon, of murder, and of attempted murder. Bechu, Babban, Baijnath, Bahoran, Bageshri, Buchnu, Damri, Gharbari, Harinandan, Hira Lal, Jeot Koeri, Kallu Chamar, Katholan, Kalicharan, Misri Lal, Mahesh, Morahu, Mauj Brahman, Panaru Kohar, Ram Kishen, Ramman, Sadho, Sheo Prasad, Saggam and Shukalu have been convicted of rioting, murder and attempted murder. Gokul, Pancham, Tika, Sumer, Shukul, Marahu and Saggam have been sentenced to death under Section 302, Indian Penal Code, and to transportation for life under Section 307, Indian Penal Code; Gokul, Sumer, Pancham, Shukul and Tika to three years rigorous imprisonment and Marahu and Saggam to two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 148, Indian Penal Code. Nazir and Kutballi have been sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment each under Section 148, Indian Penal Code, and to transportation for life under Secs.302 and 307, Indian Penal Code. Bechu, Babban, Baijnath, Bahoran, Bageshri, Bachnu, Damri, Grmrbari, Harinandan, Hira Lal, Jeot Koeri, Kallu Chamar, Katholan, Kali Charan, Misri Lal, Mahesh, Mauj Brahman, Panaru Kahar, Ram Kishen, Ramman, Sadho, Sheo Prasad and Shukalu have been sentenced to transportation for life under Secs.302 and 307, Indian Penal Code, and to two years rigorous imprisonment each under Section 147, Indian Penal Code. The offences with which the accused have been charged and convicted are alleged to have been committed in the village of Raiya, P.S. Punnuganj on 16 March 1931.

(2.) The riot in which four persons were killed and two seriously injured was the result of bitter communal antagonism in the district. For some considerable time before the riot hostility between the Mahomedans and the Hindus had been smouldering. Two days before, that is, on 14thl March 1931, this hostility flared up in the neighbouring village of Manchi where a riot occurred, the Hindus attacking the Mahomedans. It is unnecessary to go in detail into the events leading up to this not. These are described by the learned Sessions Judge of Benares in his judgment in the Manchi riot case. Suffice it to refer to the fact that feeling for some time between the two sections of the community had been running high and that the immediate cause of the outburst was the alleged killing of a cow by one Mohammad Raza. The Hindus were determined to avenge the sacrilege and the riot in Raiya in which the accused are alleged to have participated was really a continuation of the riot in Manchi on 14 March 1931. It appears that the Hindus had determined to attack the Mahomedans of village Raipur which is about one mile distant from the village of Raiya because the leading Mahomedan in Raipur, Imam Bakhsh, gave shelter to Mohammad Raza who was said to have killed the cow and who succeeded in making good his escape from Manchi on the 14th.

(3.) Imam Bakhsh received a warning from the witness Tengar of the impending attack by the Hindus of Raipur on the 15 March. It is stated that this witness acted as an intermediary between the Mahomedans and the Hindus who demanded from Imam Bakhsh payment of Rs. 400 as the price of ithe safety of the Mahomedans in Raipur. If this sum were not paid, he informed Imam Bakhsh, the Hindus were determined to plunder and kill the Mahomedans in Raipur. On the morning of the 16 March the witness, constable Dip Narain Singh, who was aware of the impending attack by the Hindus arrived in Raipur and advised the Mahomedans to leave the village. At about 10 a. m. the Hindus were seen advancing in force from the village of Khalyari which is about 2 miles distant. On their approach the Mahomedans fled from Raipur taking with them their women and children. They were pursued by the Hindu mob and upon reaching Raiya Imam Bakhsh directed them to take shelter in the house of Raghunandan Brahman who was on friendly terms with the Mahomedans. The refugees with the exception of the witness Shukurullah Saham Ali and Ramzan Ali, forced their way into Raghunandan's house. Shukullah, Saham Ali and Ramzan endeavoured to make good their escape from the village. Saham Ali and Ramzan however were overtaken and killed and later in the day their bodies were burnt; only their charred bones were eventually recovered. Shukrullah succeeded in making good his escape. He made his way to the police station at Punnuganj where he made the first information report at about 4 o clock in the afternoon.