Back
PATNA HIGH COURT
Tarkeshwar Nath and Ramratna Singh JJ.
Mithu Pandey
Versus
State Of Bihar
Criminal Appeal No. 602 of 1963 ;
Decided On : APRIL 05, 1966
CRIMINAL APPEAL - Murder - Common object of unlawful assembly - Right of private defence - Exceeding the right of private defence - Identification of assailants - Conviction and sentence set aside.
Fact of the Case:
The appellants were convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The prosecution alleged that the appellants were members of an unlawful assembly with the common object of preventing the victims from collecting mahua fruits and, if necessary, causing their deaths. The appellants claimed that they were in possession of the land where the mahua trees were located and had a right to defend their property.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellants were in possession of the land and had a right to the mahua fruits. The court also found that the appellants did not have the common object of causing the deaths of the victims, but rather to prevent them from collecting the mahua fruits. The court further found that the appellants exceeded the right of private defence, but that the identity of the assailants could not be ascertained.
Issues: 1. Whether the appellants were members of an unlawful assembly with the common object of preventing the victims from collecting mahua fruits and, if necessary, causing their deaths. 2. Whether the appellants were in possession of the land where the mahua trees were located and had a right to defend their property. 3. Whether the appellants exceeded the right of private defence. 4. Whether the identity of the assailants could be ascertained.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court found that the appellants were not members of an unlawful assembly with the common object of preventing the victims from collecting mahua fruits and, if necessary, causing their deaths. The court reasoned that the appellants were in possession of the land and had a right to defend their property, and that their intention was to prevent the victims from collecting the mahua fruits, not to kill them. 2. The court found that the appellants were in possession of the land where the mahua trees were located and had a right to defend their property. The court reasoned that the appellants had been in possession of the land for several years and had been collecting the mahua fruits from the trees. 3. The court found that the appellants exceeded the right of private defence. The court reasoned that the appellants had used excessive force in defending their property, causing grievous injuries to the victims. 4. The court found that the identity of the assailants could not be ascertained. The court reasoned that the evidence was insufficient to identify which of the appellants had caused the fatal injuries to the victims.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed and the convictions and sentences of the appellants were set aside.
Tarkeshwar Nath, J.
1. All the appellants have been convicted under Sec.302/149 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Ramdhari Singh and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life each. They have been convicted again under Sec.302/149 of the Indian Penal Code for the murder of Ramswarup Singh and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for life each Appellants Mathu Pandey alias Maiukdhari Pandey Chandradeo Pandey Kundal Pandey Davanand Pandey. Nasir Main and Muneshardhar Dubey alias Butan Dubey have been convicted under Sec.148, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year each. The remaining appellants Bife Bhogta, Thegu Bhogta, Nageshwardhar Dubey and Uma-shankar Dhar Dubey have been convicted under Sec.147, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 months each. Appellants Bife Bhogta and Thegu Bhogta have been further convicted under Sec.323, I. P. C. and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 6 months each. The sentences of each appellant are to run concurrently
2. The case of the prosecution was that village Phatpani also known as Goniyari Kala, was within Nagaruntari estate belonging to Bhaiya Rudra Pratap Deo and there were bakasht and ghairmazrua lands in village Phatpani. There were a number of mahua trees on those lands. Bhaiya Rudra Pratap Deo (hereinafter to be referred as former Bhaiya Saheb for the sake of brevity) died on 30-9-1945. After his death, his son Bhaiya Ramanuj Pratap Deo became the proprietor and he will be referred to hereinafter as present Bhaiya Saheb for the sake of brevity. It was alleged that the present Bhaiya Saheb was in khas possession of the bakasht lands and the mahua trees in the year 1962 and on 104-1962 at 3 p. m. Bindeshwari Singh. an employee of the present Bhaiya saheb, was getting mahua fruits collected on behalf of the proprietor in the field known as Barmania field in village Phatpaui. This field was in the north-estern side of that village. Dhaneshwari, Deokalia and Dewal Mahto (P Ws 1, 2 and 3) were collecting rnahua at that place. At another place on the same field and at the same time. Rajmatia, Udal Singh. Border Singh. Meglum Chamar, Ram Dihal Kharwar, Ram Toral Kharwar. Manan Singh and Jhagar Kharwar (P Ws 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13) also were collecting mahua fruits on behalf of the proprietor Ramswarup Singh and Ramdhari Singh. employees of the present Bhaiya Saheb were supervising the collection of mahua fruits Bindeshwari Singh (P W 33) heard a noise coming from the south-western side to the effect "run. run. we are being killed." He and Dewal Mahto rushed in that direction and he noticed that these appellants had surrounded Ramswarup Singh and Ramdhari Singh and were assaulting them with bhalas. garassas and lathis Dewal Mahto requested the appellants not to assault Ramdhari and Ramswarup but Bife Bhogta and Thegu Bhogta assaulted him as well with lathis. Mathu Pandey Kundal Pandey and Muneshardhar Dubey were armed with garassas. Chandradeo Pandey Dayanand Pandey and Nasit Mian were armed with bhalas whereas the remaining appellants were armed with lathis. Ramswarup Singh and Ramdhari Singh fell down and then the appellants fled away Ramdhari Singh died on the spot whereas Ram Swarup Singh was gasping for breath RamSwarup Singh was carried to the house of Butan Singh for being taken to the hospital but meanwhile he also expired Karorpati Shukla (P. W 29) another employee of the proprietor, also arrived at the time of the occurrence. The cause of the dispute was that Chandradeo Pandey (appellant No. 2) was litigating with the present Bhaiya Saheb for some years and he wanted to take possession of the lands of Bhaiya Saheb by force. Village Phatpani was at a distance of 14 miles from police station Nagaruntari. Bindeshwari Sinha (P. W. 33) lodged a first information report (Ext. 17) at 8 p. m. on 10-4-1962 in police station Nagaruntari against the 10 appellants and it was recorded by Gaya Prasad Singh, Officer-
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
