Chhedi Singh vs Emperor

Adami, J.—The five petitioners have been sentenced u/s 325 read with Section 149, Penal Code, to six weeks rigorous imprisonment each and to a fine of Rs. 50; they have also been bound down u/s 106, Criminal Procedure Code, to keep the peace for a year.

The case proved against these petitioners and found by the lower Court is that they were cutting the crop of one Raghunandan Singh and when he went to protest they beat him and Deonandan and caused many injuries on the bodies of these two persons.

The petitioners have been found guilty on the facts by both the Courts below. The only questions that arise before us now are with regard to the order passed u/s 106, Criminal Procedure Code, and with regard to the punishment imposed on the petitioners.

With regard to the order u/s 106 it is quite clear that it cannot be upheld. The amendment to Section 106 by the Act XVIII of 1923 has made an order u/s 106 impossible where the only section under which the accused are convicted is a section of: the Penal Code which is read with Section 149. The amendment is not very happily worded for it speaks of an offence punishable under 8. 149. Now no offence is punishable u/s 149 alone: there must be some substantive offence charged to be read with Section 149.

In the present case the petitioners were convicted u/s 325 read with Section 149 and u/s 106 as it now stands, an order cannot be passed against them under that section.

With regard to the sentence, considering the number of injuries and their severity, caused by the unlawful assembly, on the persons of Raghunandan and Deonandan, the sentence of six weeks'' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 50 each is not too severe even though most of the petitioners are members of one family.

The result is that the order passed under the provisions of Section 106, Criminal Procedure Code, must be set aside but the conviction and sentences passed under 8. 325, read with Section 149, Penal Code, must be upheld.

Bucknill, J.

I agree.