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

2014 Supreme(All) 2613

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Rakesh Tiwari, Kalimullah Khan, JJ.
State of U.P - Appellant
Versus
Rajnath & others - Respondent
Government Appeal No. 825 of 1982
Decided On : 31-03-2014

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : A.G.A.
For the Respondent: Sri V.M. Zaidi, Sri D.N. Yadav.

The judgment established the principle that the right of private defence can be exercised when faced with an imminent threat, and the burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Headnote:

Right of Private Defence - Criminal Law - Section 378 Cr.P.C.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a dispute over the use of a pumping set for irrigation, which led to a physical altercation resulting in the death of one party. The accused claimed that they acted in self-defence.

Finding of the Court:

The trial court found that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and acquitted all the accused. The court held that the deceased party appeared to be the aggressor and that the accused had the right to exercise self-defence.

Issues: The main issues revolved around the conflicting accounts of the incident, the use of weapons, and the injuries sustained by the parties involved.

Ratio Decidendi: The court determined that the accused had the right to exercise self-defence based on the circumstances of the altercation and the injuries sustained by the parties. The prosecution's failure to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt led to the acquittal of the accused.

Final Decision: The appeal lacked merit, and the judgment and order of acquittal were upheld.

JUDGMENT

Kalimullah Khan, J.: -

We have heard Sri R.Y. Pandey, learned A.G.A. appearing for the appellant-State, and Sri V.M. Zaidi assisted by Sri D.N. Yadav, learned counsel appearing for the respondents-accused. Perused the record.

2. As per report of C.J.M. Ghazipur and order of the Court dated 18.9.2003, accused respondent no. 3, namely Kuber Yadav has died and therefore appeal against him stands abated.

3. This government appeal has been filed under Section 378 Cr.P.C. by State of U.P. against the accused, (1) Rajnath (2) Lachhman Yadav both sons of Kuber Yadav, and accused no. 3, Kuber Yadav son of Jauhar, all R/O Sauna (Arare) P.S.- Saidpur, District- Ghazipur, challenging the impugned judgment and order of acquittal dated 23.12.1981, passed by Ist Addl. Sessions Judge, Ghazipur in Sessions Trial No. 77 of 1981, on the ground that the judgment is against the law and facts of the case, and the learned trial court has not followed the settled principles of appraisal of evidence while appreciating the evidence of witnesses on record and thereby miscarriage of justice has occurred.

4. Parashuram son of Jauhar Yadav, R/O Village-Sauna (Arare), P.S.- Saidpur, District-Ghazipur, lodged his report with an accusation that he has four brothers. All of them residing separately as partition has taken place among them inter see. His brothers namely, Sangam and Dwarika lived together. First of all, first informant Parashuram had separated from his other four brothers. When rest four brothers living together, they had purchased four Bighas of agricultural land and later on, about one year before the incident of marpeet i.e. 26.11.1977, separation took place among them also in the manner that Sangam and Dwarika remained joint while Kuber and Shanker separated from them and from each other. There was a pumping set installed in that part of said four Bighas of land, but on partition it was allotted to the accused, Kuber and it was run by electricity.

5. The prosecution case is that the pumping set was installed when Sangam, Dwarika, Kuber and Shanker were still joint and in the later partition it was given to Kuber without other three brothers being given any recompense for their shares. It was solemnly agreed between them that Sangam, Dwarika and Shanker would be entitled to take water from the pumping set for irrigating their fields whenever they might require, without paying any thing to Kuber for the same.

6. On 26.11.1979, in the morning Sangam asked Kuber to allow him to take water on that day from the pumping set for irrigating his field and Kuber consented telling that he might take the water since 2.00 P.M. when electric current was likely to be available. Parashuram also intending to irrigate the field, requested Kuber to allow him to take water from the pumping set and Kuber gave his assent to him also telling that he might take the water after the field of Sangam would have been irrigated. Subsequently, at about 2.00 P.M., Sangam went to the pumping set when perhaps it had started running, and asked Kuber for allowing him to take water, but Kuber declined the same. The other two accused, Rajnath and Lachhman, were also present there. Sangam got annoyed and exclaimed that he came to take on having been assured to get it, but was being refused. Thereafter, Sangam walked to the east along with the water channel and went to the place from where the water might be diverted to his field. The three accused also went behind him to that place to stop him from diverting the water. Now an exchange of abuses ensued between Sangam and the accused. Parashuram, Ram Badan, Tilku and Smt. Sirtaji, the wife of Sangam, were cutting grass at nearby places and they proceeded to that place, but before they could actually reach it, the accused, who were carrying lathis in their hands, wielded the same on Sangam. Parashuram and Badan hurried their steps to save Sangam and then they too were struck and caused injuries. Parashuram was injured by accused, La





























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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 Back to top