Skip to content


Amanat and ors. Vs. Emperor Through Shakur - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtAllahabad
Decided On
Judge
Reported inAIR1922All184; 65Ind.Cas.424
AppellantAmanat and ors.
RespondentEmperor Through Shakur
Excerpt:
penal code (act xlv of 1860), section 297 - putting obstacle in burying dead child--boycott--offence--security to keep peace. - - they did not me any violence to him, though they boycotted him effectively......facts are correct. the four men in question deliberately put obstacles in the way of muhammad shakur burying his son because he had not joined the khilafat movement. they did not me any violence to him, though they boycotted him effectively. they have been convicted under section 297, indian penal code, of having offered an indignity to the corpse of the dead child, they have also been bound over to keep the peace. the matter has some before me on a reference from the session judge in respect of the order to keep the peace and in revision in respect of both orders, i do not, propose to expatiate upon the mentality of persons who, to support their views as to what they conceive desirable in politics, use their influence to prevent a man from burying: his little child. but as the law.....
Judgment:

Stuart, J.

1. The facts are as follows: On the 27th of July 1921 the son of Muhammad Shakur died of cholera in a village in the Ghazipur District. Muhammad Shakur told the barber to arrange for the digging of a grave. The barber came back and said that Amanat, Ghura, Jamait, Fateh Ali and another were preventing the grave being dug, Muhammad Shakur went to these person and protested. They replied that as be was not joining the Khilafat party they would not permit his son to be buried. It has been found that the above facts are correct. The four men in question deliberately put obstacles in the way of Muhammad Shakur burying his son because he had not joined the Khilafat movement. They did not me any violence to him, though they boycotted him effectively. They have been convicted under Section 297, Indian Penal Code, of having offered an indignity to the corpse of the dead child, They have also been bound over to keep the peace. The matter has some before me on a reference from the Session Judge in respect of the order to keep the peace and in revision in respect of both orders, I do not, propose to expatiate upon the mentality of persons who, to support their views as to what they conceive desirable in politics, use their influence to prevent a man from burying: his little child. But as the law stands they have note committed any criminal offence in this particular case. The act was an act of boycotting and was not a criminal act either under the Penal Code or any other law. The suggestion that by their action they offered an indignity to the child's corpse, is almost fantastic. As the appellants have not committed any criminal offence under the law, I must allow this application, get aside their convictions and sentences and direct a refund of their fines if they have been paid. The order that they should furnish security is set aside.


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