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

2018 Supreme(All) 2370

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SUDHIR AGARWAL, OM PRAKASH-VII, JJ.
Nem Singh & Others - Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.2549 of 1983
Decided On : 24-10-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : N.K.Sharma, Hemendra Pratap Singh, P.K.Kashyap, R.P.Singh, R.S. Yadav, Rajendra Pal Singh, Virendra Saran, Virendra Singh
For the Respondent: A.G.A., S.S. Yadav

Headnote:

POSSESSION DISPUTE - CRIMINAL LAW - [Sections 147, 148, 302, 323, 325 IPC] - The court analyzed the possession dispute over a disputed property and found that both parties engaged in a free fight for possession. The prosecution failed to explain the injuries sustained by the accused, leading to suspicion and suppression of the incident's origin. The court set aside the convictions for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and 148 IPC, modifying the conviction for the offence under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC to the offence under Section 323 IPC simplicitor.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved a possession dispute over a disputed property, leading to a free fight between the parties. The prosecution failed to explain the injuries sustained by the accused, raising suspicion and suppression of the incident's origin. The accused engaged in a battle for possession, and the court found that the prosecution did not establish the possession of the informant over the disputed property at the time of the occurrence.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to explain the injuries sustained by the accused, leading to suspicion and suppression of the incident's origin. It concluded that both parties engaged in a free fight for possession over the disputed property. The court set aside the convictions for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and 148 IPC, modifying the conviction for the offence under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC to the offence under Section 323 IPC simplicitor.

Issues: The main issue revolved around the possession dispute over the disputed property and the failure of the prosecution to explain the injuries sustained by the accused, leading to suspicion and suppression of the incident's origin.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the failure of the prosecution to explain the injuries sustained by the accused, leading to suspicion and suppression of the incident's origin. It concluded that both parties engaged in a free fight for possession over the disputed property, leading to the setting aside of the convictions for certain offences and the modification of the conviction for another offence.

Final Decision: The court set aside the convictions for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and 148 IPC, modifying the conviction for the offence under Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC to the offence under Section 323 IPC simplicitor.

JUDGMENT :

OM PRAKASH-VII, J.

1. Present Criminal Appeal has been preferred by accused-appellants against judgment and order dated 21.10.1983 passed by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Aligarh in Session Trial No. 395 of 1981 (State of U.P. Vs. Nem Singh & others) relating to crime no. 25 of 1980, Police Station Dadon, District Aligarh convicting and sentencing the accused Nem Singh, Sheodan, Kedari, Bhim Singh, Yad Karan, Biri and Mahendra for imprisonment of life for the offence under Sections 302/149 IPC. They have been further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of one year each under Section 323/149 IPC on three counts for causing voluntarily simple hurt to Rishipal, Satyapal and Doongar Singh and further rigorous imprisonment for a term of one year each under Section 148 IPC. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. Prosecution story in nut shell, as unfolded in written report, moved by Malkhan-P.W.-1, are as follows:

3. P.W.-1 had been cultivating land of Smt. Surajmukhi on “Batai” and the area of the land was ten bighas. He had also entered into an agreement to sell (registered) with Smt. Surajmukhi to purchase the same land for an amount of Rs. 15,000/-one year prior to the occurrence. Part of the consideration i.e. Rs. 10,000/-had been paid and remaining amount of Rs. 5,000/-was to be paid to Smt. Surajmukhi at the time of execution of sale deed. In the aforesaid 10 bighas of land informant had raised crop of Chana and Laha. Chana crop was destroyed but laha crop was good. As per informant, Smt. Surajmukhi cheated him and she sold her share to accused persons despite agreement to sell with the informant. On 20.2.1980 at about 11 A.M. in village Chandiyana within the Police Station Dadon, district Aligarh while P.W.-1 Malkhan, P.W.-2 Satyapal and P.W.-3 Doongar, Kundan and Rishipal were harvesting Laha crop in that field then all seven accused persons came there and told them that they had obtained a sale deed, therefore, the Laha belonged to them and they would not let P.W.-1 Malkhan and others to take away the Laha. Informant told them that the crop had been sown by him and that he would harvest it. At this, Kedari abused them and asked his companions to kill P.W.-1 Malkhan and others. Kedari and Nem Singh had ballam and the other five accused had lathis. They started beating Satyapal, Doongar, Rishipal, Kundan and Malkhan. They raised alarm at which Rajendra, Lakhan, Charan Singh and other villagers came and saved them. Kundan, uncle of Malkhan, and Doongar suffered lathi and ballam injuries and Satyapal and Rishipal also suffered injuries of lathis. Injured were taken to Police Station by first informant where he handed over written report (Ext. Ka-1) to police concerned.

4. On the basis of written report, Ext. Ka-1 chik FIR (Ext. Ka-2), was registered at crime no. 25 of 1980, under Sections 147, 148, 324, 325 IPC against seven accused on 20.2.1980 at 3.10 P.M. G.D. entry was also made which is Ext. Ka-3. Investigation commenced. First of all Investigating Officer sent injured Kundan to Primary Health Centre, Chharra for medical treatment where P.W.-6 medically examined him and prepared injury report Ext. Ka-9. Since the condition of the injured was serious he was referred to Jawahar Lal Nehru Medical College, Aligarh where he was admitted and bed head ticket (Ext.Ka-8) was prepared. During treatment injured Kundan died at 10.50 P.M. on the same day i.e. 20.2.1980.

5. Injured Doongar at 4.20 P.M., injured Satyapal, at 4.30 P.M. and injured Rishipal at 5.00 P.M. were medically examined by P.W.-6 on the same day. Injury report in respect of injured are Ext. Ka.-10 to Ext. Ka-12. Investigating Officer also recorded statement of Kundan (injured-deceased) under Section 161 Cr.P.C. (Ext. Ka-3) and other witnesses and after visiting place of occurrence prepared site plan Ext. Ka-4. Investigating Officer also took into his possession blood stained and simple earth and preparing fard prepared sam

                  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 Back to top