A.N. Grover, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal by special leave from a judgment of the Allahabad High Court. Originally 13 persons were tried under Sections 302, 324 and 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Some of them were further charged under Section 148 and some under Section 147, Indian Penal Code. Seven were acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge. Six of them, namely, the present appellants were convicted under Section 304, Part I read with Section 149, Indian Penal Code and each was sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment. Braham Singh, Randhir and Tri were also convicted under Section 148, Indian Penal Code, each having been sentenced to one years rigorous imprisonment. The remaining three, Mohinder, Khilari and Rajpal were convicted under Section 147 for which a sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment, was imposed. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Two against the acquittal of 7 persons and the other, by the six appellants. Both the appeals were dismissed by the High Court.
(2.) ACCORDING to the High Court plot No. 854 which formed part of Chak No. 12 in village Kishanpur in Meerut district had a long and chequered history. There had been a good deal of litigation in respect of it extending over two decades. It is unnecessary to give the details but it would appear that Narain Singh had been in continuous possession of that plot since the year 1934 but the rightful holders of title, according to the decision of the courts, were the family of Atal Singh, Atal Singh executed a sale deed in 1954 in favour of the appellants Braham Singh and Tri Pal in respect of some properties including the aforesaid plot and it were the appellants who were in possession of the said plot at the time of the incident which took place on April 3, 1965 at about 7 a.m. Narain Singh's nephew Ishar Singh sustained a large number of injuries and died later on. Narain Singh's son Jaipal P.W. 1 and brother Ram Saroop P.W. 2 also sustained injuries. Out of the appellants Braham Singh had five injuries two of which had been caused by some sharp -edged weapon. The case of the prosecution was that Narain Singh and his two sons Jaipal and Narendra, his brother Ram Swarup and his nephew Ishwar Singh were cutting wheat crop from plot No. 854 on the material date when 13 accused accompanied by numerous other persons came to the spot. Out of them Randhir Singh was armed with a Tabal. Others had Balams and Lathis with the exception of two who did not have any weapons. They shouted that Narain Singh and others be killed. Narain Singh immediately left the place and sent a telegram to the Senior Superintendent of police, Meerut reporting the trouble. It was alleged that Manphool and Sukhpal instigated other persons to attack Ishwar Singh. Randhir gave the first blow with his Tabal to Ishwar Singh who was then belaboured by other ten persons who were armed with various weapons mentioned before. Ram Swarup was assaulted by Yashpal, Khilari, Mahendra and Rajpal, while Jaipal was assaulted by Khilari, Mahendra and Rajpal. Ten of the accused persons denied their presence at the spot. The other three, namely, Braham Singh s/o Manphool, Tri Pal and Manphool admitted their presence and top up the position that Braham Singh was in possession of the plot and the wheat crop had been sown by him. When he and his brother were cutting the wheat crop along with some labourers Narain Singh and others came there and attacked them causing injuries with Balams and lathis. On seeing this the father who was working in an adjoining field rushed and gave a "palkati" blow over the head of Ishwar Singh. Tri Pal also wielded a lathi in self -defence. After the palkati blow had been given to Ishwar Singh there was an exchange of blows.
(3.) THE Sessions Judge was of the view that since Braham Singh and the members of his family were in possession of plot No. 854 they had acted in exercise of right of defence of property. Consequently he acquitted those persons who had caused minor injuries to Jaipal and Ram Swarup but he held that the right of private defence had been exceeded in respect of Ishwar Singh who had been inflected such injuries that he ultimately died. The High Court found that even after possession had been taken of the plot by Braham Singh, Narain Singh was still creating trouble and was not allowing him to remain in peaceful possession and that Narain Singh made a bid to take possession by cutting wheat crop on the morning of April 3, 1965 when the incident took place. Looking at the nature and number of injuries it was held that the right of private defence of property had been exceeded by the appellants. This is what the High Court observed towards the conclusion of its judgment: From the nature of the injuries received by Braham Singh it would appear that all of them were of a minor nature. That being so, the accused would have been justified in causing only such injuries to the other side as were sufficient to drive them away from their field. The learned Sessions Judge, therefore, rightly acquitted those accused who had caused injuries to Ram Swarup and Jaipal. But so far as the injuries of Ishwar Singh which ultimated in his death were concerned, the learned Sessions Judge came to the conclusion that those accused who had caused the injuries to Ishwar Singh had exceeded in the exercise of right of private defence of property.;