The essential element of the offence under S. 447, I.P.C., is the intention to cause annoyance, intimidation or insult to the person in possession of the property.

ORDER :

Each of the petitioners has been convicted under S. 447, I.P.C., and sentenced to R.I. for 15 days.

2. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioners held a meeting on 12-2-1962 in the premises of the Office of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Bargarh, and gave speeches through a mike and thereby caused annoyance to the Deputy Collector (P.W. 1) and his head clerk (P.W. 2) and as a result of the said meeting, such a disturbance was created that no person in the office of P.W. 1 could work. P.W. 2 brought this fact to the notice of the Second Officer P.W. 3, who directed P.W. 2 to lodge information before the Police and to direct the organisers of the meeting to stop the meeting and to change its venue. P.W. 1 lodged F.I.R. (Ext. 1) and after investigation charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioners under S. 447, I.P.C.

3. The plea of the accused petitioners was that they did not hold the meeting in the office premises of the S.D.O., nor did they cause any annoyance to anybody. The plea of the petitioner Sajan Mithal was that the Congress Party is harassing him by starting false cases against him since he belonged to the Socialist Party.

4. The prosecution examined some witnesses to prove its case and the learned Magistrate convicted the accused persons under S. 447 and sentenced them as above. On appeal the learned Sessions Judge upheld the order of conviction and sentence. Hence the petitioners have come up with this revision.

5. Mr. Das, learned counsel for the petitioners contended : (1) That the prosecution has not established that any meeting was held inside the premises of the Office of the S.D.O. and that such premises was in his possession at the time of the alleged meeting; (2) That it being election time the sole object of the meeting was to carry on canvassing by holding meetings and processions etc. and it was not the intention to cause any annoyance, intimidation or insult to the S.D.O. or any member of the staff.

6. With regard to the first contention, the courts below came to the finding that the meeting was held inside the premises of the Office of the Sub-Divisional Officer. To make out a case under S. 447, I.P.C., the prosecution has to establish criminal trespass within the meaning of S. 447, the material portion of which runs as follows :

"Whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an offence or to intimidate, insult or annoy any person in possession of such property is said to commit criminal trespass.

Thus it has first to be established that the property was in fact in the possession of the aggrieved person. It is the prosecution case that the petitioners held the meeting at a place which was in the possession of the S.D.O. It was contended that the S.D.O. himself was not present in his office at the time the alleged trespass is said to have been committed and the S. D. O. was not in a position to say if in fact the alleged meeting was held inside his office premises. Further, there is a map showing the exact boundary of the premises in question, but the said map has not been produced, though it was admitted by the S. D. O. : that such a map is available.

The trial Court was of the view that the production of that document would have been the best evidence to ascertain the extent of the premises of the office of the S. D. O. But all the same, the courts below accepted the oral evidence and held that the meeting took place within the premises of the office of the S. D. O. Admittedly, there is no compound wall and the boundary of the premises is defined by pillars. It further appears from evidence that at the place where the alleged meeting was held many persons gather including snake charmers who exhibit their charm by blowing trumpets. On account of this state of evidence Mr. Das contended that it cannot be said that the premises of the office of the S. D. O. has any defined boundary so as to make out that it was exclusively in his possession and to