Rakhal Douli vs Makham Lal Ghose - 1927 Supreme(Cal) 257

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1927 Supreme(Cal) 257

GRAHAM, CUMING
Rakhal Douli – Appellant
Versus
Makham Lal Ghose – Respondent

JUDGMENT

Cuming, J. - The facts of the case on which this rule has been granted are these; the petitioners ware convicted under Sections 143 and 379, I.P.C., and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 100 in default to three months' rigorous imprisonment u/s 379. No separate sentence was passed u/s 143, I.P.C.

2. The case against them was that, on 1st November 1925, they cut and took away the complainant's paddy. The defence was that the petitioners grew the paddy and so cut it.

3. The Magistrate found that the complainant was in possession and grew the paddy. Hence he convicted the petitioner as stated above. On appeal the learned Additional Sessions Judge held that there had been certain proceedings u/s 145, Criminal P.C., and the result of those proceedings was that, on the 28th of January 1925, the complainant was declared to be in possession, and further, that he would remain in possession till evicted in due course of law. Hence the learned Judge argued that it was idle for the appellants to produce evidence that they were in actual possession; for, even if it be so, they cannot be anything but trespassers. Hence he held that the conviction was right.

4. If I understand the learned Judge rig

Click Here to Read the rest of this document