The learned Sessions Judge, on a companysideration of the evidence, held that the cattle were attached on the evening of May 31, 1955, and that, after their seizure, they were kept in the house of Har Narain.
The defence version is that on June 1, 1955, at about 7 a. m. the first appellant, Tika, was taking his two buffaloes for grazing when Har Narain and 1 1 others came with the amin and forcibly snatched the said buffaloes, that when Tika objected to it, those 12 persons assaulted him with lathies, that when appellant 2, Raja Ram, came there, he was also assaulted, and that Tika and Raja Ram used their lathies in self defence.
79 and 89 of 1959.
C. Mathur and C. P. Lal for the respondent.
S. R. Chari, B. K. Gary, D.P. Singh, S. C. Agarvial and K. Ramamurthi, for the appellants.
February 15.
Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated May 6,1959, of the Allhabad High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by SUBBA RAO, J. These two appeals are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellants and maintaining the companyvictions and sentences imposed on them by the learned Sessions Judge Meerut, under a. 147, s. 424, s. 452, s. 325, read with s. 149, and is.
323, read with s. 149, of the Indian Penal Code.
The amin to whom the said warrant was entrusted attached, inter alia, three buffaloes and two companys, which were in the house of the judgment debtor, as his property.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeals No,.
Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is as follows One Har Narain had obtained a decree from the companyrt of the Additional Munsif, Ghaziabad, against one Sunehri Jogi for a sum of money.
The amin kept the cattle in the custody of one Chhajju, the sapurdar.
As the said sapurdar had numberaccommodation in his house for keeping the animals, he kept them for the night in the enclosure of the decree holder with his permission.
The next day at about 7 a. m., the nine appellants, armed with lathies, went to the enclosure of the decree bolder and began to untie two of the attached buffaloes.
In execution of that decree the Munsif issued a warrant for the attachment of the judgment debtors property.
Thereafter, appellants 1.
2 and 3 took away the two buffaloes followed by the other appellants.
1224 of 1957.
The decree holder, his son and his nephew protested against the acts of the appellants whereupon the appellants struck the three inmates of the house with lathies, and when P.W. 4 intervened, they struck him also with lathies.
The learned Judges said, Since the possession passed from the accused to the custodians, the cutting of the crop by the accused in March 1951 was dishonest.
On appeal, the learned Judges of the High Court accepted the finding arrived at by the learned Sessions Judge and companyfirmed the companyvictions and the sentences passed by him on the accused, but directed the various sentences to run companycurrently.
On that finding, he companyvicted the accused as aforesaid.
Hence the appellants have preferred these two appeals against the Judgment of the High Court.
