Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
M. C. JAIN AND B. B. AGRAWAL, JJ.
STATE OF U. P. - Appellant
Versus
DHAKAN - Respondents
Govt. Appeal 44 Of 1981
Decided On : 09/14/2005
Rioting - Right of Private Defence of Property - Indian Penal Code, Section 103 - The court discussed the right of private defence of property as per Section 103 of the Indian Penal Code and its application in the case. The accused were acquitted based on the exercise of the right of private defence of property as the court found that the injured parties had trespassed into the field of the accused, thereby justifying the accused's actions.
Fact of the Case:
The accused were tried for the offence of rioting, attempt to murder, and voluntarily causing hurt to three persons. The injured parties had trespassed into the field of the accused, leading to a confrontation and assault.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused acted in exercise of the right of private defence of property as the injured parties had trespassed into their field with a tractor, justifying the accused's actions.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused's actions constituted an offence within the ambit of the law or if they were justified under the right of private defence of property.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the accused did not commit any offence within the ambit of the law as they were justified in exercising the right of private defence of property due to the trespass committed by the injured parties.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and it was noted that it had already abated in respect of the deceased accused. The court also awarded a fee to the counsel who argued for the accused as amicus curiae.
( 1 ) SIX accused respondents, namely, Dhakan, Bechey Lal, jagdlsh, Bahoran, Omkar and Ulfat were tried before VI Additional Sessions Judge, bareilly for the offence of rioting, attempt to murder and voluntarily causing hurt to three persons, namely, Karan Singh, Sipattar singh and Dharmapal Singh. They came to be acquitted by judgment dated 29-9-1980 impugned in this appeal from the side of the state. Out of them, Dhakan and Ulfat died during the pendency of appeal and the same abated under order dated 28-11-2003. Jagdish and Bechey Lai are the sons of dhakan whereas Bahoran ad Omkar are his nephews and Ulfat is his cousin brother.
( 2 ) WE have heard Miss Usha Kiran, learned A. G. A. from the side of the State and sri Surendra Pal Singh for the accused bechey Lal, Bahoran and Omkar, Jagdish absconded and Sri R. C. Upadhyaya was appointed amicus curiae for him under order dated 7-7-2005. Sri Upadhyaya has been heard for him.
( 3 ) THE prosecution case, in broad essentials, was that the injured and accused were the residents of the same village. The injured Karan Singh PW-1 had purchased some land from Pati Ram (brother of accused dhakan) prior to the presence occurrence which took place on 28-7-1979 at about 10. 00 a. m. Dhakan had also purchased some land from Pati Ram. The land purchased by Karan Singh was mutated in his name. Since then the accused Dhakan, his sons and nephews harboured enmity against karan Singh. Gyan Singh (informant) PW-3 had arrived at the house of Karan Singh a day before the incident. The daughter of karan Singh was married to him. Sipattar singh PW-2 and Dharmapal Singh PW-5 were the sons of Karan Singh. On 28-7-1979 at about 10. 00 a. m. Dharmapal Singh took out his tractor. It was being driven by him while Gyan Singh, Sipattar Singh and Karan singh were seated in the trolley of the tractor. They were going to Fatehganj East. When they reached near the disputed land, Karan singh saw the accused Dhakan standing there with a lathi. Dhakan challenged that in case the tractor would be driven through his field or by that side, he would kill him. The other accused also appeared there. Bechey Lai, Jagdish and Bahoran were armed with spears and the accused Ulfat and Omkar had lathis with them. All of them started assaulting Dharmapal Singh with their weapons as a result of which he fell down from the tractor. Karan Singh and sipattar Singh were also assaulted. Gyan singh implored the accused not to assault them. On the shrieks of the injured, Onkar pw-6, Ghanshyam and others also reached at the scene of occurrence. Gyan Singh made arrangement for carrying the injured to the hospital but the accused persons again appeared and held out a threat to kill him, if he would take the injured to the hospital. Thereafter, some police constables including amar Singh PW-8, who were on patrol duty, reached there. Seeing, them, the accused persons ran away, barring Dhakan who was captured. The police constables brought the injured along with Gyan Singh and the accused Dhakan to the police station, where written F. I. R. was lodged by Gyan singh PW-3 on 28-7-1979 at 3. 15 p. m.
( 4 ) A case was registered. The investigation was taken up by Satish Chandra saxena, the then S. O. PW-7. The injured were taken to P. H. C. where their injuries were examined. Thereafter they were taken to Bareilly Hospital for their treatment.
( 5 ) THE injured of the incident were three, namely, Karan Singh PW-1 and his sons sipattar Singh PW-2 and Dharmapal Singh pw-5. Their injuries were examined on 28-7-1979 between 6. 20 p. m. to 7. 20 p. m. One punctured wound, one contusion and one abrasion were the visible injuries sustained by Sipattar Singh. Punctured wound was caused by sharp pointed weapon and rest by blunt object. On X-ray being taken one of the injuries (contusion on top of head)was found to be grievous and dangerous to life being on vital part. Karan Singh sustained hree punctured wounds and one contusion. Puncture
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
