HARJAN Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused was charged with the offence under Section 457, I.P.C., read with Section 23, Criminal Tribes Act. There can be no doubt as to the facts. They are proved by the direct evidence of no less than four witnesses. The complainant, while sleeping inside his house at night heard a noise and woke up. He noticed a thief lifting paddy tied in a cloth on his head, which had been kept in the house. The complainant at once got up and captured the thief and shouted for help. On this, three of his neighbours came in and secured the thief. It was the accused himself who was recognized by the villagers. A report to the police was duly made and the accused with the bundle of paddy was handed over to the Sub-Inspector who immediately took him under arrest. All the four assessors who heard the evidence unanimously agreed that the case was fully proved. There can be no manner of doubt as to the propriety of the conviction.

(2.) The accused is admittedly a registered member of criminal tribe. In October 1925, the accused was first convicted under Section 457, I.P.C. and sentenced to fifteen stripes. In April 1926 he was again convicted under Section 456 read with Section 75, I.P.C., and sentenced to eighteen months rigorous imprisonment. This time he is again found guilty of an offence under Section 457, I.P.C. There can be no doubt that Section 23, Criminal Tribes Act, is applicable.

(3.) The learned Sessions Judge, however, treats the present conviction not as a third conviction making the accused punishable with transportation for life but as a second conviction. His reason is as follows: But as there was no second conviction under Section 23, Criminal Tribes Act, this should be considered for the purpose of Section 23 his second conviction.