Decided on January 17,1979

JODHA RAM Appellant
ONKAR SINGH Respondents


D.B.LAL,J. - - (1.) This appeal is brought from the judgment of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kangra at Dharamsala, acquitting Onkar Singh of the offence under section 323 of the I. P. Code and the complainant Jodha Ram had filed this appeal against the acquittal under special leave granted by this Court.
(2.) The facts governing the case were, that Jodha Ram was cultivating the disputed land, measuring 12 Kanals, out of a certain Khata described in a complaint as tenant under Onkar Singh. He claimed to be cultivating that land from 4/5 years although the revenue entries did not exist in his favour. For that he asked for correction of the revenue entries, but his application was defeated and the learned counsel representing the appellant submits before us that an appeal was filed before the Settlement Officer against the previous rejection of the application for correction of the revenue entries. It was, therefore, undisputed that the revenue entries made in the revenue record were subject -matter of a dispute between the parties. At any rate, Jodha Ram claimed to have cultivated the land from 4/5 years. Nevertheless, it was stated that Onkar Singh accused along with a few others appeared at about 8.00 P. M. on 18 -6 -1970 and attempted forcible possession over the land. In that connection they went to Jodha Ram and caused some injuries to him. Subsequently, Jodha Ram lodged a complaint before the Magistrate. He was medically examined by one Dr. V. D. Sharma who found lacerated wounds and injuries on his person. The case was a complaint case and the Magistrate also asked for police investigation and ultimately issued process and framed charge under section 323 of the I. P. Code against Onkar Singh. His co -accused were, however, discharged. While the case proceeded against Onkar Singh as many as four eye -witnesses were produced by Jodha Ram who are Jodha Ram himself, Joti (PW -2), Kirpa Ram (PW -3) and Devia (PW -4). Dr. V. D. Sharma (PW -5) also appeared to prove the injuries.
(3.) The defence of Onkar Singh was that he was landowner and that he never acknowledged Jodha Ram to be his tenant. The revenue entries were in his favour. However, he denied that no such incident took place. He produced three witnesses, namely. Yog Raj (DW -1), Bardoo Ram (DW 2) and Dali Ram (DW 3). Yog Raj (DW -1) and Bardoo Ram (DW -2) stated that only the accused cultivated the disputed land while Dali Ram (DW -3) besides saying so also admitted that the accused was in Government service in Delhi for the last 14/15 years.;

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.