SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1968 Supreme(Raj) 168

L.S.MEHTA, C.M.LODHA
STATE – Appellant
Versus
BHOLA SINGH – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
G.M.Mehta, KUSUM SURANA, N.C.MISHRA, N.L.Tibrewal, O.C.CHATTERJI, Renu Chatterjee, Than Chand Mehta

Judgment


MEHTA, J.

( 1 ) THERE lived one Nand Singh Sikh in the village Uttamsinghwala. He had had six sons, namely (1) Bhola Singh, (2) Gurdev Singh, (3) Darshan Singh, (4) Makhan singh, (5) Raja Singh and (6) Gurmej Singh. The accused Bhola Singh had been separated from the joint family. He was living in the northern portion of the family house, in the Chak Uttamsinghwala. The rest of the brothers were living with their parents in its southern part. The other accused Kor Singh is the son of the accused Bhola Singhs wifes sister. It is alleged by the prosecution that on July 21. 1967, at about noon, when the deceased Makhan Singh and Raja Singh were irrigating their agricultural land, their brother Bhola Singh blocked the water course and diverted water towards his own land. Makhan Singh objected to it and turned water towards his land on the rear side, with the result that water stopped from flowing into Bhola Singhs field. This enraged Bhola Singh. He hurriedly went to his house and returned to his field with a "barcha". His father Nand Singh, his mother Mst. Gurdayal Kaur, P. W. 2, and his uncle Hari Singh intervened. They stopped Bhola Singh from putting up fight with his brot























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top