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

2005 Supreme(Online)(SC) 54

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
N/A, J
State – Appellant
Versus
Bechey Lal, Jagdish, Bahoran, Omkar – Respondent
Govt. A. No. 44 of 1981



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Miss Usha Kiran
For the Respondents: Sri Surendra Pal Singh, Sri R. C. Upadhyaya

The right of private defense of property is sustainable despite the lack of explicit plea if supported by evidence.

Headnote:In this case concerning offences of rioting and attempt to murder, the Court reviews the findings of the lower court regarding the acquittal of six accused on grounds of enmity and private defence of property, highlighted under Section 103 of the Indian Penal Code. The Court noted that the injured party had unlawfully entered the accused's property, justifying the accused's response and asserting that this fact aligns with the legal principles governing property rights. Ultimately, the appeal was found to lack merit and dismissed. Acquittal affirmed.

Table of Content
1. facts of the incident involving accused and injured. (Para 1 , 3 , 5)
2. defense based on property rights and trespass. (Para 6 , 9 , 10)
3. right of private defense applicability. (Para 8 , 12)
4. final judgment and dismissal of the appeal. (Para 13)

1. Six accused respondents, namely, Dhakan, Bechey Lal, Jagdish, Bahoran, Omkar and Ulfat were tried before VI Additional Sessions Judge, Bareilly for the offence of rioting, attempt to murder and voluntarily causing hurt to three persons, namely, Karan Singh, Sipattar Singh and Dharmapal Singh. They came to be acquitted by judgment dated 29-9-1980 impugned in this appeal from the side of the State. Out of them, Dhakan and Ulfat died during the pendency of appeal and the same abated under order dated 28-11-2003. Jagdish and Bechey Lal are the sons of Dhakan whereas Bahoran ad Omkar are his nephews and Ulfat is his cousin brother.

2. We have heard Miss Usha Kiran, learned AGA from the side of the State and Sri Surendra Pal Singh for the accused Bechey Lal, Bahoran and Omkar, Jagdish absconded and Sri R. C. Upadhyaya was appointed amicus curiae for him under order dated 7-7-2005. Sri Upadhyaya has been heard for him.

3. The prosecution case, in broad essentials, was that the injured and accused were the residents of the same village. The injured Karan Singh PW 1 had purchased some land from Pati Ram (brother of accused Dhakan) prior to the presence occurrence which took place on 28-7-1979 at about 10.00 a.m. Dhakan had also purchased some land from Pati Ram. The land purchased by Karan Singh was mutated in his name. Since then the accused Dhakan, his sons and nephews harboured enmity against Karan Singh. Gyan Singh (informant) PW 3 had arrived at the house of Karan Singh a day before the incident. The daughter of Karan Singh was married to him. Sipattar Singh PW 2 and Dharmapal Singh PW 5 were the sons of Karan Singh. On 28-7-1979 at about 10.00 a.m. Dharmapal Singh took out his tractor. It was being driven by him while Gyan Singh, Sipattar Singh and Karan Singh were seated in the trolley of the tractor. They were going to Fatehganj East. When they reached near the disputed land, Karan Singh saw the accused Dhakan standing there with a lathi. Dhakan challenged that in case the tractor would be driven through his field or by that side, he would kill him. The other accused also appeared there. Bechey Lal, Jagdish and Bahoran were armed with spears and the accused Ulfat and Omkar had lathis with them. All of them started assaulting Dharmapal Singh with their weapons as a result of which he fell down from the tractor. Karan Singh and Sipattar Singh were also assaulted. Gyan Singh implored the accused not to assault them. On the shrieks of the injured, Onkar PW 6, Ghanshyam and others also reached at the scene of occurrence. Gyan Singh made arrangement for carrying the injured to the hospital but the accused persons again appeared and held out a threat to kill him, if he would take the injured to the hospital. Thereafter, some police constables including Amar Singh PW 8, who were on patrol duty, reached there. Seeing, them, the accused persons ran away, barring Dhakan who was captured. The police constables brought the injured along with Gyan Singh and the accused Dhakan to the police station, where written F.I.R. was lodged by Gyan Singh PW 3 on 28-7-1979 at 3.15 p.m.

4. A case was registered. The investigation was taken up by Satish Chandra Saxena, the then S.O. PW 7. The injured were taken to P.H.C. where their injuries were examined. Thereafter they were taken to Bareilly Hospital for their treatment.

5. The injured of the incident were three, namely, Karan Singh PW 1 and his sons Sipattar Singh PW 2 and Dharmapal Singh PW 5. Their injuries were examined on 28-7-1979 between 6.20 p.m. to 7.20 p.m. One punctured wound, one contusion and one abrasion were the visible injuries sustained by Sipattar Singh. Punctured wound was caused by sharp pointed weapon and rest by blunt o

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