BUDH SINGH Vs. KING-EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Budh Singh And Ganga Singh have been convicted by Babu Murari Lal, Magistrate first Class, Etawah, under Section 176, I.P.C., and each of them has been sentenced to pay a fine of

(2.) The facts on which the applicants have been convicted, as appears from the judgment of the lower Court, are that they are zamindars of village Dadra and that they have, been realizing more than the recorded rent from their tenants for a long time without giving any information about it to the officials concerned. The learned Magistrate was of opinion that the applicants omitted to perform a legal obligation by intentionally withholding the information. The applicants in revision have set forth several grounds on which they impugn the judgment of the lower Court, but the only point argued before me is that the facts as found by the Magistrate do not constitute an offence under Section 176, Indian P.C. I think the ground taken by the applicants is correct in law.

(3.) Looking to Section 46 of the Land Revenue Act, I find it laying down: any person, whose rights, interests or liabilities are required by any enactment for the time being in force, or by any rule under any such enactment, to be entered in any official register by a Qanungo or Patwari, shall be bound to furnish, on the requisition of the Qanungo or Patwari, or of any Revenue Officer engaged in compiling the register, all information necessary for the correct compilation thereof.