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

1978 Supreme(All) 166

P.N.HARKAULI
Kishan Lal – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Virendra Saran

JUDGMENT

P. N. Harkanli, J.

1. APPLICANTS Kishan Lal, Khusi Lal, Mohan, Brindavan and Atar Singh were convicted u/Sec. 379 IPC and sentenced to pay a fine (sic) of defaulting applicant was ordered to undergo two months rigorous imprisonment. The sentences not being appealable the applicants preferred a revision which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Thereupon this second revision was filed.

2. THE prosecution case was that Ajudhi had raised the potato crop in question and that the applicants forcibly cut and removed that crop on 6-2-72 at 7 a. m. and thus they committed an offence of theft.

The three applicants namely, Krishan Lal, Brindavan and Atar Singh admitted that they had cut and removed the crop but contended that the crop had been raised by them after purchasing the land from the brother in law of Ajudhi under a registered sale-deed and so there was no question of theft. The other two applicants denied having removed the crop.

3. THE complainant entered the witness box as PW 1 and examined two witnesses Ram Swarup (PW 2) and Chokhey Lal (PW 3) who stated that the crop belonged to the complainant and it was forcibly taken away by the applicants.

4. BOTH







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