KISHAN CHAND AND ORS. versus STATE OF U.P.

Citation: [2007] 10 S.C.R. 1022 · Decided: 10-10-2007 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

-~ 
A 
KISHAN CHAND AND ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF U.P. 
OCTOBER 1-0, 2007 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND H.S. BEDI, JJ.J 
Penal Code, 1860: 
C 
ss.3021149, 147, 3071149-Dispute over land allotted to accused 
]-Villagers objecting to his raising construction thereon-Accused 
persons equipped with guns and lat his reaching land in question and 
raising construction-On 1esistance by villagers, accused persons 
started firing indiscriminately-Resulting in death of two and injuries 
D to several others-Conviction by courts below--Justification of-Held: 
Justified-Number and nature of injuries sustained by prosecution 
witnesses show that accused persons shared common object to commit 
offence-Accused persons were aggressors-Overt act started from 
their side and villagers were not armed at all and had assembled only 
to resist construction. 
E 
Prosecution case was tha,t the accused No.I was in possession 
of the land allotted to him but his attempt to raise construction 
thereon was objected to by the villagers. On complaint, he gave an 
undertaking before the police authorities that he would not carry out 
F any construction thereon. On the fateful day, accused No.1and2 
armed with guns and accused N o.3, 4 and 5 armed with la this came 
to the land in question along with hired labourers and started 
construction. Large number of villagers assembled at that place and 
requested accused not to raise construction until the dispute is 
G resolved by the competent court. Accused No.1 and others started 
abusing them. Accused Nos.3 to 5 allegedly exhorted accused Nos. 
1and2 to shoot 'M' and others whereupon accused No.1 ran towards 
the roof of the nearby Kothri owned by' M' and from the roof thereof, 
he started firing. Accused No.2 also fired from his gun. Deceased 1 
H 
1~2 
\ 
y 
KISHANCHANDv. STATE 
1023 
standing at the Galiyara received a gun shot injury. He died at the A 
spot. 'M' and others also received firearm injuries. Deceased 2 who 
had also sustained gun shot injuries breathed his last in the hospital. 
The accused had defended their case on the ground that while 
the said accused no.1 with the help of others including hired labourers 
started constructions, the deceased 1 and 2 along with large number B 
of persons being armed with guns and lathis reached there and 
caused obstructions. Upon protest having been lodged, all of them 
advanced towards him with a view to kill him. He then ran to the roof 
of his father's Baithaka but deceased 1 and his companions 
surrounded his house. An attempt was also made to molest 'SD', C 
sister of accused nol. Only at that time, with a view to save the 
modesty and honour of his sister as also to save the life of other 
members of the family, they caused injuries to various persons. 
The Trial Court convicted accused Nos. 1 and 2 under ss.148, D 
302/149 and307 IPC and accused Nos.3 to 5 underss.147,302/149 
and 307/149 IPC. High Court upheld the conviction. Accused Nos.1 
and 3 died during pendency of appeal before the High Court. 
Accused Nos. 2, 4 and_ 5 filed the present appeal. 
Dismissing the appeal, the Court 
E 
HELD: 1. From the materials brought on record, it is evident 
that the villagers never intended to dispossess accused No.1. They 
were only resisting his right to raise any constructions thereupon. 
When the appellants together with Accused No.1 and Accused No. F 
3 went to raise constructions, they were armed with deadly weapons. 
Accused Nos. 1 and 2 were armed with a double barrel gun and a 
single barrel gun respectively, the others were having lathis in their 
hands. They had hired labourers also with them. Only when they 
started raising constructions, the deceased and the prosecution G 
witnesses objected thereto. It had come on record that they were 
not required to raise construction till the lis is determined. The 
accused persons did not listen to the said advice. They started 
abusing the members of the prosecution party. They were requested 
not to use abusive language. Accused Nos. 3, 4 and 5 asked Accused H 
1024 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2007] 10 S.C.R. 
A Nos. 1 and 2 to kill them or to assault them. Accused No. 1 went to 
the roof top of a house. He fired shots at least aiming at two persons 
standing at two different places. He must have fired some other shots 
also. Deceased No. 1 was standing at the Galiyara whereas deceased 
No. 2 was standing near the wall towards t~e West of the said Kothi. 
B It has been proved that Accused No. 2 also fired shots. 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.