EMPEROR Vs. AKOSH KUNBI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AKOSH Kunbi has appeared in this Court and pleaded, as he was entitled to do, that the offence of which he has been found guilty was not proved and he ought to have been acquitted and should be acquitted now. I have therefore examined the whole record and find the following facts clearly proved. Akosh had a dispute with Barkia Kunbi over land, in which the latter was victorious and obtained a decree in a civil Court though this was not directly against Akosh. On the night of the 1st of April 1926, about 9 or 10 p. m. Barkia went a short distance outside the abadi to case himself and while he was squatting on the ground Akosh ran at him with a stick in the darkness and belaboured him with it. He struck him twice on the head, causing two contused scalp-wounds on the left parietal bone, but, luckily for both of them, no fracture of the skull. He struck him a third time on the head, causing a bruise two inches long on the left temple, though Barkia himself is recorded as describing this as a blow on the chin. He then struck him across the left shoulder on the back of his left wrist and more than once on the inner part of his thighs aiming apparently at fora testicles. The injury to the left wrist was almost certainty a fracture of a bone, which remained undetected on account of the swelling. Finally Akosh sat on Barkia and set about strangling him, but he fled on the arrival of others who had heard Barkia's shouts.

(2.) BARKIA had to be carried home. On the 3rd of April he was taken to the Dispensary at Multai where he remained till the 25th, that is for twenty-two days, quite unable to follow his ordinary pursuits. In both the Courts below the period during which he was so disabled has been taken to be twenty two days. That leaves out of account the two days before he was taken to the Dispensary, and also the injury to 'the wrist. That, as has been said, was almost certainly a fracture of a bone, probably the radius near its lower end, but anyhow on the 7th of May, thirty seven days after the assault, Barkia was recorded as saying, with obvious truth: All my wounds except the one at the left wrist are now healed. I am as yet unable to discharge any of my duties. I am a cultivator. I cannot plough my fields. I am also unable to perform winnowing operations at my khalyan.

(3.) NOT only was he there for 22 days but he had been disabled for two days before he went there and remained so for at least twelve days after he left, and probably many more. On that mistaken view of the facts the Sub-divisional Magistrate ordered Akosh to execute a bond in Rs. 200 with one surety under Section 562 of the Criminal P.C.