JUDGMENT

Srivastava, J - The facts which constitute common ground between the prosecution and defence are that Chhote Lal is a money-lender residing in Lucknow who has money dealing with several tenants residing in village Mohammada-bad, Police Station Safdarganj, district Bara Banki. He advanced a loan of Rs. 40 to one Gaya Din. Kali stood surety lor him. On 27th November 1926 Chhote Lal instituted a suit against Gaya Din and Kali in the Court of the Additional Judge, Small Cause Court, Lucknow. At the date of hearing the parties entered into a compromise under which the defendants were allowed to pay the money by instalments. The Judge, Small Cause Court, decreed the claim of Chhote Lal for Rs. 75-8-0 with further interest at 12 per cent per annum in accordance with the terms of the compromise. It appears that the instalments were not paid as agreed upon and Chhote Lal applied for execution of his decree against Gaya Din and Kali both.

2. The story for the prosecution as told by the prosecution witnesses is that on 3rd March 1932 Chhote Lal accompanied by three of his sipahis namely, Durjan, Hari and Lal Bahadur and two process servers, Haidar Ali and Maula Bakhsh, went to village Moham-madabad to execute the warrant of attachment. According to Ram Asre the brother of Kali who lives next door, the door, of Kali's house was locked with a padlock, when Chhote Lal and his party reached the place. The process servers told Chhote Lal that as Kali was not in the house the padlock should be broken in order to effect attachment. Thereupon Durjan accused struck the padlock with his lathi and it was broken. One of the shutters of the outer door of the house was also removed. The servants of Chhote Lal along with the process servers then entered the house. Ram Asre on seeing this went off to the field of Kali about half a mile from his house to inform him of the attachment which was proceeding at his house. Kali on being informed of it came to his house and on his way asked Sakhawat Mian an under-proprietor and agent of the Raja of Harda who holds proprietary interest in that village to accompany him and to stand surety for him. When he reached the house followed by Sakhawat Mian he found the whole party outside the house and some wheat and utensils lying there. Some other articles are also said to have been brought out of the house by Hari and Durjan after Kali reached the house. The evidence of Kali is that he had sold a pair of bullocks to one Jagannath for Rs. 108 about a fortnight before the attachment and that the entire sale price was kept by him in a handi which also contained some silver ornaments. He found the handi with the silver ornaments lying outside but not the cash. He then asked Chhote Lal about this amount of Rs. 108 and requested him to appropriate it in part payment of his debt and offered Sakh-wat Mian as surety for the balance. Chhote Lal denied that there had been any money in the handi. This led to a dispute in which Chhote Lal and Kali called each other baiman.

3. Thereupon Chhote Lal who admittedly had a gun in his hand is said to have rushed at Kali and grappled with him. When the two were grappling Lal Bahadur struck Kali with a lathi. Thereafter the two Court peons are also alleged to have struck Kali one Lathi blow each on his thigh. This was followed by one other lathi blow given by Lal Bahadur on the right arm of Kali. Sakhawat Mian then protested and Hari struck two lathi blows on Sakhawat Mian who fell down on the ground. One of the neighbours Bhairon Kahar also came up to the scene of occurrence about this time and interceded on behalf of Kali and Sakhawat Mian. Durjan who was standing at a distance of twenty or twenty-five steps then attacked Bhairon and struck him a lathi blow on his head which felled him to the ground. Chhote Lal then firmed his gun and he as well as the process servers and the other persons of this party beat a retreat and ran away towards the east. Debi father of Bhairon and one