EMPEROR Vs. SUAR GOLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference under Section 307, Criminal P.C., by the Additional Sessions Judge of Patna, regarding the unanimous verdict of "not guilty" given by a jury in Sessions Trial No. 9 of 1934, "King Emperor V/s. Suar Gola, accused, under Section 436, Indian Penal Code." The charge framed against Suar Gola was under Section 436, Indian Penal Code, that on 3 November 1933, at Painathi, P.S. Maner, he committed mischief by fire intending to cause the destruction of a tari shop belonging to Dalchand Pasi. The offence was said to have been committed 1 pahars after sunset.

(2.) There was only one eye-witness, Jhapsi Dusadh. He claimed to have seen Suar setting fire to the hut, to have pursued Suar for about half-a-mile, and to have caught Suar in a field containing Masuria Jinora crop with the assistance of Ramchander Dusadh. It is alleged that after capturing Suar they took him to the landlord, who lent a rope for tying the prisoner and told them to take Suar to the police station. Then they went to the police station, picking up the chaukidar Ramkishun on the way. At the police station a police constable told them to guard the prisoner for the rest of the night because he did not like to rouse the Sub- Inspector at 1 a. m. While waiting at the police station, they fell asleep and Suar made good his escape. Next morning at 5-30 a. m., the complainant Dalchand lodged a "first information report" and investigation was started. Suar was not to be found, though proclamation and warrant of attachment were issued against him. After the Magistrate had been recording evidence under Section 512, Civil P.C., Suar surrendered in Court on 9 January 1934.

(3.) The case was supported in Court by the evidence of Dalchand complainant, Jhapsi and Ramchander, and certain other villagers who claimed to have seen Suar in custody. The landlord deposed that Suar was brought to him at about 10 p. m., and was charged with arson. The chaukidar deposed that he went with Suar Dusadh and others to the police station that night. But the constable did not support the prosecution case, and averred that he did not see Suar or any of the villagers at the police station till the early morning. Accused Suar pleaded not guilty and said that the case was false and concocted on account of previous enmity. When asked about the enmity, he said that it arose out of damage done by his cattle to the crops of the prosecution witnesses. As regards the alleged absconding, he said that he had gone to Gaya and then to Purulia in order to sell a cow.