MUSAHRU Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal arises out of a trial in which 26 persons were charged some with rioting with deadly weapons ( Section 148); others with rioting ( Section 147) and again some with murder ( Section 302 read with Section 34) and others constructively charged with murder ( Section 302 read with Section 149). Six of the accused were acquitted and 20 have been convicted and sentenced under Section 302 read with Section 34 and Section 302 read with Section 149 respectively all to transportation for life. The occurrence giving rise to the offences charged took place in a diara within the elaka of police station Nathnagore. There are two adjoining villages Bairiya and Dildarpur, the former being to the west of the latter. There is a boundary dispute between these villages which has led to the attachment of a large block of land which is alleged by one party to fall in village Bairiya and to be in possession of its proprietors through their tenants and by the other party to fall in village Dildarpur and to be in possession of the proprietors and tenants of that village.

(2.) According to the prosecution, Sarobar Prasad Singh had grown rainchi crop in plot No. 169 of village Bairiya which was his occupancy land and was not part of the subject-matter of the Section 145 proceedings. He had reaped the crop and had stored it in plot No. 126/391 of the same village. This plot is said to belong to Mahabir Kumar. It has an area of 8 bighas 13 kathas 15 dhoors and a certain part of this area falls within the subject-matter of the Section 145 proceedings but part of it is outside that area and it is in this part that Sarobar Prasad by permission of Mahabir Kumar had stored his rainchi crop and kept a hut. On 2 February, 1939 a large mob consisting in the main of villagers of Sahebgunj who have land in Dildarpur came with deadly weapons and attacked the party of the prosecution. This party consisted of Sarobar Prasad and his brother Anandi, Jhumak Gossain, Mahabir Kumar, Biranchi and Bhothri Jha. These persons were sitting and talking at the khamar in plot No. 126/391. The mob coming near began to pelt them with brickbats and stones.

(3.) The prosecution party scattered in different directions and were chased by members of the mob with the result that Anandi, Jhumak and Biranchi were-each surrounded and killed. Another witness Pardip Singh who came to the place later than the former six persons received two lathi injuries. The mob also demolished the hut at the khamar and looted bundle of rainchi crop which had been kept there. Substantially these allegations have been found by the Sessions Judge to be true and twenty appellants to have been sufficiently identified, some as actually taking part in the violent attacks on Anandi, Jhumak and Biranchi and others as present in the mob with knowledge that murder was likely to be committed in the prosecution of its common object.