HIRA KURMI Vs. MADAN SAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by the Additional District Magistrate of Patna recommending that the order of a Deputy Magistrate with Second Class powers releasing two persons, Rameswar and Madan Sao, after due admonition be considered in the exercise of our revisional jurisdiction. It appears that these two persons together with two others were convicted of offences under Section 323 and Section 323 read with Section 114, I.P.C., but that considering that Rameswar "is a man of position and a respectable person with grey hairs" the trying Magistrate thought it "desirable in the interest of justice" to deal with him under Section 562 (1-A), Criminal P.C. and to do the same to his nephew Madan Sao, "a hot-headed young man who took the law in his own hands" with the admonition and warning "that they should not indulge in such nefarious practice of assaulting anybody because their interest was at stake." The Additional District Magistrate points out that according to the trying Magistrate it was Rameswar's motive "to debar the complainant from giving evidence against him" in a certain civil suit. The age of Rameswar is not particularly in his favour nor is his physique, and it is reported that he is the man who not only organised the assault party and gave orders for the assault, but also took part in it, and that the motive for the assault was "reprehensible" because the assault was organised as the complainant did not agree to Rameswar's proposal "which amounted to the suppression of evidence to be produced before a Court of justice." The Additional District Magistrate also - says that it is clear from the trying Magistrate's judgment that this money-lender even during the course of the trial managed to gain over a number of prosecution witnesses by bribing them.

(2.) WE have heard Mr. Jayaswal for Rameswar and Madan Sao, and Mr. Sukul for the complainant, and we have it from them that so far as the private aspect of the matter is concerned, the parties have made up their differences; but the case obviously has a public aspect in view of what we have quoted from the Additional District Magistrate's letter of reference. WE have here a money-lender and his nephew endeavouring to overawe a witness for the other side in a civil suit and because he refused to comply with the money-lender's demands, "organised an assault party," taking part in the assault on the man in question, and further during the course of the criminal trial winning over a number of prosecution witnesses by bribing them. This is undoubtedly a serious state of things, and it seems to us impossible to permit a Compromise in such a case or to let the matter drop merely because the parties have made up their differences. The order of release after due admonition completely overlooked this aspect of the matter, and we must replace it by an order which the trying Magistrate ought to have passed namely a fine of Us. 200 under Section 323 and Section 323 read with Section 114, I.P.C. with six weeks rigorous imprisonment in default, in the case of Rameswar, and a fine of Rs. 50 under Section 323 with three weeks rigorous imprisonment in default, in the case of Madan Sao. Rameswar and Madan will be allowed two weeks from this date to pay their fines in, and if the fines are not paid by that time, the other part of the order must be carried out. The reference is accepted.