JUDGMENT

Scott-Smith, J. - This is a joint appeal by six persons Bhajan Das, Haku, Ganga Jat Fakiria, Ganga Barber and Arjan, who have been convicted by the Sessions Judge of Hoshiarpur of offences under Sections 366-149, 325-149 and 148, Indian Penal Code, and have been senterced to various terms of imprisonment for each offence. The facts are briefly as follows : Mt. Ishri, daughter of Mt. Kirpo, is the widow of Bhagat Ram of Earn Nangli. She has three sisters married in the village of Jandoli where Fakiria and Haku live. Fakiria is married to one of those sisters and Haku is the uncle of Fakiria. Mt. Kirpo and subsequently Mt. Ishri herself brought complaints against one Khushia charging him with having fraudulently got Mt. Ishri's thumb-mark affixed to an entry in the Marriage Register making out that she had been married to him. For some time whilst these cases were pending Mt. Ishri was living with Haku, appellant, in Jandoli village. Before the date of the occurrence, the 8th December, 1921. Mt. Kirpo had taken her daughter away to live with her. On the 8th December there was a hearing of the complaint against Khushia in a Magistrate's Court at Hoshiarpur. Fakiria and Haku, knowing that Mt. Kirpo and Mt. Ishri would be at Hoshiarpur on the 8th of December, met Mt. Kirpo in the Kutchery compound and asked her to send Mt. Ishri back to Jandoli with them. Mt. Kirpo refused to do so. After the hearing of the case was over Mt. Kirpo and Mt. Ishri, accompanied by Santu, deceased, were going along the road in Hoshiarpur where the six appellants are said to have overtaken them and to have forcibly carried off Mt. Ishri and to have beaten Santu who tried to prevent them. Santu was knocked down and died on the spot shortly afterwards and the medical evidence shows that his death was due to rupture of the spleen which was enlarged owing to disease. In addition to the rupture of the spleen, Santu received two or three other simple injuries one being on the head; but it is quite clear that the beating received by him was in no sense a severe one. The Police after receiving the First Information Report recorded a charge under Section 304, Indian Penal Code, and eventually chalaned the six appellants under that section. They did not chalan them under Section 366 at all apparently considering that no offence had been committed under that section. After the abduction, Mt. Ishri was taken to Jandoli village where, on the morning after the occurrence, she was found in the house of her sister, the wife of Fakiria. Haku and Fakiria admit that they took away Mt. Ishri from her mother. They also admit that they had a fight with Santu to whom they gave some blows. Their main defence is (1) that Mt. Ishri had been married to Haku by chadar andazi and (2) that she went with them voluntarily though she made a show of resistance. The learned Sessions Judge in an exhaustive judgment has held that the alleged chadar andazi marriage with Haku has not been proved, that Mt. Ishri did not go voluntarily with Haku and Fakiria that all the appellants took part in the assault, that they constituted an unlawful assembly and that though they had no knowledge that they were likely to cause the death of Santu, yet as they struck, him blows upon a vital part of the body they must be held to have intended or known that they were likely to cause grievous hurt. He accordingly convicted them under the sections aforesaid.

2. Mr. Mul Chand has taken me through the evidence on the record. His contentions are: (I) that Mt. Ishri was the married wife of Haku, (2) that she went voluntary with the appellants or some of them, (3) that even if she was not the married wife of Haku, still the ingredients necessary to constitute an offence under Section 366 have not been established, and (4) that it cannot be said that the appellants intended to cause or knew that they were likely to cause grievous hurt to Santu. After a persual of the evidence I agree with the learned Sessions