Back
1964 Supreme(Raj) 212
High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : L.N.Chhangani
KALU - Appellant
Versus
STATE - Respondent
Criminal Appeal 292 Of 1964
Decided On : 11/02/1964
B.C.Chatterji, D.C.Bajpai, R.N.Surolia
In a free fight, neither party can claim the right of private defense.
Headnote:
CRIMINAL LAW - Right of Private Defence - Free Fight - Burden of Proof - Sentence - Reduction.
Fact of the Case:
A free fight occurred between two groups of people, resulting in injuries to both sides. The appellants, who were part of one group, were convicted of various offenses, including causing grievous hurt and voluntarily causing hurt. They appealed their convictions and sentences.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the fight was a free fight, meaning that both parties were voluntarily engaged in the fight and there was a mutual intent to harm each other. The court also found that the appellants had not discharged the burden of proving that they acted in self-defense.
Issues: 1. Whether the fight was a free fight or whether the appellants acted in self-defense. 2. Whether the sentences imposed on the appellants were excessive.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. A free fight is one in which both parties voluntarily engage in the fight and there is a mutual intent to harm each other. The burden of proving that a fight was a free fight is on the prosecution. 2. The burden of proving self-defense is on the accused. In order to establish self-defense, the accused must show that they were acting in response to an imminent threat of death or grievous hurt and that they used no more force than was necessary to protect themselves.
Final Decision: The court upheld the convictions of the appellants but reduced their sentences.
L. N. CHHANGANI, J.
( 1 ) THE three appellants, Kalu, Buchia and Delia of village Binds, have been convicted and sentenced as follows by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhalawar, vide his order dated 21st April, 1964:--U/s. 328 r/w sec. 34 I PC 7 years R. I. Kalu and Ors. vs. The State (02. 11. 1964 -RAJHC) Page 2 of 10 (02. 11. 1964 -RAJHC) Page 2 of 10 325 r/w sec. 34 IPC 5 years R. I. . 324 r/w sec. 34 IPC 1 years R. I. 323 r/w sec. 34 IPC 6 months R. I. All the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.
( 2 ) SIX more persons were tried along with the appellants but they have been acquitted.
( 3 ) THE facts leading to the prosecution of the appellants and the six others, may be briefly given as follows: One Mst. Kesar--daughter of Goria of village Banda-was given in marriage to Panna--the elder brother of Manna PW/1 of village pathria. According to the present prosecution, after Pannas death, Manna contracted a nata marriage with Mst. Kesar on the 12th day of the death of his brother Panna. Thereafter, the prosecution case is that she went to her father goria at village Banda. The prosecution case further is that Kalyan son of accused buchia of village Binda took her away from village Banda and kept her as his wife. Manna and others of village Pathria thereupon claimed some jhagra money from buchia and Ramkalyan. Although the controversy in connection with the payment of jhagra-money had been going on for a year and a half before the present incident which took place on 24-5-1963, it could not be settled. Three days before the incident the complainant Manna collected 30 to 40 persons of three to four villages and went to village Baravda Binda and from there they sent Kanwerlal chamar to Buchia accused demanding the payment of jhagra-money. Buchia seni kalia Baret informing the persons collected at Baravda that he was prepared to pay Rs. 250/- as jhagra money and that the complainant-party should be sattslied with the amount. The complainant-party did not accept the amount and, therefore, the persons assembled went to their villages. The prosecution case further is that on the date of the incident, Manna had gone to village Aklera to attend the market and when he was returning from that village, Chania deceased met him near village Tukaia and asked Mana to accompany him to enjoy a feast at Daikheda. When Manna and Chunia had proceeded beyond Baravda, nine persons including the three appellants, attacked them and inflicted injuries upon Chunia and Manna. Chunia was seriously injured and died on the spot. Manna PW/1 managed to escape. He, thereafter saw mangilal and Kishore and informed them of the assault upon Chunia and himself by the nine persons including the appellants. Mangilal and Kishore PW/3 and PW/2 respectively went to the spot to intervene but they were also seriously injured. Manna thereafter went to Daikheda obtained a bullock cart and eventually took the body of deceased Chunia to the Police Station, Aklera, and lodged a first information report Ex. P-1 at 11. 30 P. M. It may be mentioned here that the members of the accused party also received injuries during the course of the incident and. Buchia also lodged information with the Police Station Aklera at about 12 night which was recorded as Ex. D-17. The police registered cases against both the parties and after investigation submitted charge sheet against the three appellants and six others in the court of Munsif Magistrate, Aklera and the case was after enquiry, committed by the said Munsif Magistrate to the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Jhalawar.
( 4 ) THE prosecution examined nine witnesses to prove its case. Out of these witnesses, Manna PW/1, Kishore PW/2 and Mangilal PW/3 are the three eye witnesses who were also injured. All the accused pleaded. not guilty. The three appellants camel forward with a counter version. Buchia appellant stated as follows:
"i had gone for the Hatt at Aklera in order to sell the bullock. And after that
