LAWS(ALL)-2016-11-124

DARYAB SINGH Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS

Decided On November 19, 2016
Daryab Singh Appellant
V/S
State of U.P. and others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) List revised. None is present on behalf of the revisionist to press this criminal revision. However, learned A.G.A. is present.

(2.) This criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 4.1.1990 passed by the Sessions Judge, Rampur in Criminal Appeal No.56 of 1989 acquitting the appellants and reversing the judgment of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur dated 6.11.1989 convicting the opposite parties (accused) under Sec. 198-A of U.P.Z.A. & L.R. Act, 1950 (in short, 'the Act') for five months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs.500.00 each and in default of payment of fine to further undergo one month rigorous imprisonment.

(3.) The prosecution story, in nutshell, is that a written report Ex.Ka-1 was made by Daryab Singh to Tehsildar Shahabad alleging that Gram Samaj land was allotted to the complainant on patta and possession was delivered to him by the Kanoongo and Lekhpal with the aid of the police. The complainant claimed that appellants, namely, Ram Prasad, Ahmad Hasan, Din Dayal and Aram Singh along with one Bharat forcibly cut the crop of the said land and dispossessed him. On the basis of the application EX.Ka-1 dated 23.9.1982 an FIR was lodged by the Tehsildar, Shahabad, alleging that 1.20 acre of land was allotted to Daryab Singh and the said appellants forcibly dispossessed the complainant. The case was registered under Sec. 198-A of the Act at Police Station Shahabad on 19.10.1982. Investigation was conducted and after investigation a charge sheet Ex.Ka-12 was submitted against the accused persons. Charges were framed against the said appellants and thereafter conviction was recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Aggrieved against the judgment of conviction, an appeal was filed and the learned Appellate Court allowed the appeal by setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentence and acquitted the accused persons. Aggrieved against the order of appellate court, the present revision has been preferred.