Skip to content


Bhagwan and ors. Vs. the State of Uttar Pradesh - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtAllahabad High Court
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Revn. No. 1500 of 1950
Judge
Reported inAIR1953All358
ActsIndian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 34 and 323; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1898 - Sections 32; Cattle Trespass Act, 1871 - Sections 24
AppellantBhagwan and ors.
RespondentThe State of Uttar Pradesh
Appellant AdvocateJagdish Sahai, Adv.
Respondent AdvocateA.G.A.
DispositionRevision dismissed
Excerpt:
criminal - trespassing - sections 323 and 334 of penal code, 1860 and section 32 of cattle trespass act, 1871 - cattle of applicants strayed into the field of complainant - applicants attacked complainants causing injury - applicants convicted under sections 323 and 334 - revision filed - held, sentence of applicant to be upheld as it was a clear case of attack and injury. - - there is no good reason to interfere with that finding. having regard to these circumstances and the serious injuries caused to sri ram, i see no good reason to reduce the sentence......of the applicants were grazing the crop in the complainant's field and he was taking them to the cattle-pound when the applicants attacked the complainant and inflicted on his person a number of injuries. one of them was of a serious nature being an injury on the head, the rest were simple. the learned magistrate convicted them of the offence under section 323/34, i. p. c., and sentenced them to one year's rigorous imprisonment each. in appeal the learnedsessions judge altered the conviction to one undersection 323/34, but maintained the sentence.3. the finding of fact is clear and categorical that the injuries were caused to sri ram by the applicants. there is no good reason to interfere with that finding.4. learned counsel has, however, pressed for the reduction of the sentence......
Judgment:
ORDER

Bind Basni Prasad, J.

1. This is a petition in revision arising out of a case in which the applicants wore convicted under Section 323/34, I. P. C., and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment.

2. The cattle of the applicants were grazing the crop in the complainant's field and he was taking them to the cattle-pound when the applicants attacked the complainant and inflicted on his person a number of injuries. One of them was of a serious nature being an injury on the head, the rest were simple. The learned Magistrate convicted them of the offence under Section 323/34, I. P. C., and sentenced them to one year's rigorous imprisonment each. In appeal the learnedSessions Judge altered the conviction to one underSection 323/34, but maintained the sentence.

3. The finding of fact is clear and categorical that the injuries were caused to Sri Ram by the applicants. There is no good reason to interfere with that finding.

4. Learned counsel has, however, pressed for the reduction of the sentence. Experience shows that it is becoming common now that when cattle stray into one's held and they are taken to the cattle-pound, the owners of the cattle attack the persons whose field they graze and injure them. This must be stopped with stern hands. Cattle owners should take care of the cattle and they should not cause injuries to the crop of others.

This is particularly necessary in this agricultural country, at a time whom there is food scarcity. Having regard to these circumstances and the serious injuries caused to Sri Ram, I see no good reason to reduce the sentence.

5. The revision is dismissed. The bail bonds are cancelled. The applicants shall be taken intocustody and servo out the remainder of their sentences.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //