RAGHUBANSH LAL versus THE STATE OF U.P.

Citation: [1957] 1 S.C.R. 696 · Decided: 20-02-1957 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: B. JAGANNADHADAS · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

1957 
6% 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
RAGHUBANSH LAL 
ti. 
THE STATE OF U. P. 
[1957] 
(JAGANNADHADAS, 
JAFER 
IMAM, 
Gov1NDA 
MENON and 
J. L. KAPUR JJ.) 
Criminal Trial-Knowingly forniing record in incorrect tna1111er 
-Intention to cause loss or injury-Indian Penal Code, s. 218. 
1"hc appellant, being a Patwari, was found to have made an 
incorrect entry regarding possession over certain disputed plots in 
the khasra for the year 1358 F, and was eonvieted under s. 218 of 
the Indian Penal Cod< .• 
Held, that in order to sustain a conviction undc.r s. 218 of the 
Indian Penal Code it is not sufficient that the entry is incorrect, 
it is 
essential that the 
entry should have been 
made with intent 
to cause, or 
knowing it to 
be likely to cause, loss or injury to 
some person. The incorrect entry in regard to the year 1358 F. 
could not cause any loss to the complainant 
a~ alleged in the 
charge, because when the entry was alleged to be made the case 
under s. 145 of the 
Criminal Procedure Code had already been 
decided 
and it could not confer hereditary tenancy on the person 
recorded to be in occupa1ion in the year 1358 F. as s. 16 of the 
U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act benefited persons 
recorded to be in possession in the year 1356 F. and not the 
year 1358 F. 
CRIMINAL 
APPELLATE 
Jua1so1cT10N: 
Crimir.al 
Appeal No. 94 of 1955. 
Appeal by special leave 
from the 
judgment and 
order dated September 7, 1954, of the Allahabad High 
Court in Criminal Appeal No. 647 of 1952 arising out 
of the judgment and order dated June 7, 1952, of the 
Court of Sessions Judge at 
Ghazipur in .S. T. No. 11 
of 1952. 
H. /. U mrigar, for the appellant. 
G. C. Mathur and C. P. Lal, for the respondent. 
1957. February 20. 
The 
Judgment of the 
Court 
was delivered by 
KAPUR J.-This is an appeal by Special leave under 
Art. 136 of the Constitution of India against the J udg-
ment of the 
Allahabad 
High 
Court confirming the 
conviction of the 
Appellant 
Raghubansh 
Lal 
under 
s. 218 of the Indian Penal Code. 
-
) 
-
S.C.R. 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
697 
The offence for which the appellant was tried was, 
that being a Patwari of village Arazi Mafi Pandai and 
thus a public servant, he "framed the khasra of 1358 F 
in respect of plots Nos. 170 and 74/1 of village 
Arazi 
Mafi Pandai", which he knew "to 
be 
incotrect 
with 
intent to cause or knowing to be likely that he would 
thereby cause an undue loss to Smt. Mahura Kunwar." 
The facts out of which this appeal has arisen are 
these. 
Two brothers, Mahadeo and Sahdeo, who were 
members of a joint 
Hindu family owned certain plots 
of land. 
Mahadeo 
died 
leaving a 
widow 
Basera 
Kunwar, a 
son 
Damodar 
Pande 
and a 
daughter 
Mahura Kuer. 
Sahdeo died 
leaving a widow Sundra 
Kuer. 
On the death of Damodar 
Pande, one 
Ram 
Sewak 
Pande brought a 
suit 
against 
Smt. 
Besera 
Kunwar 
and Smt. Sundra Kuer 
for possession 
of 
zamindari property 
including sir and sayar 
left 
by 
Damodar Pande which was dismissed. 
On the death 
of Basera Kunwar, Adit Pande son of Ram Sewak and 
one Ganga Pantle got their names mutated in regar'.i 
to this property. 
Smt. M:i.hura Kuar then brought a suit for possession 
of the estate left by Smt. Basera Kunwar against Adit 
Pande and Ganga Pande which was decreed on August 
1, 1941. 
On May 31, 1943, Smt. Mahura Kuar obtained 
possession through Court of this estate 
which included 
the two plots Nos. 170 and 74/1. 
On February 25, 1950, Mahura Kuer made an appli-
cation to the Sub-Divisional 
Magistrate for taking pro-
ceedings under s. 145 of the 
Criminal Procedure 
Code 
against Adit Pande and Ganga Pande. The 
Magistrate 
ordered the attachment of the land including the two 
plots Nos. 170 and 74/1, and it is alleged that posses-
sion of these two plots was given to Shubh 
Karan as 
sapurdar or custodian. 
The property remained 
under 
attachment from 
March 15; 1950, to 
December 
18, 
1950, which would comprise a part of 1357 F and a 
pan of 1358 F. 
On December 18, 1950, the proceedings taken 
by 
the Magistrate ended in favour of Mahura Kuar with 
the finding that ' her possession had been established. 
Adit Pandc and Ganga 
Pande 
were restrained 
from 
1957 
Raghuhansh Lal 
v. 
The State of U.P. 
Kapur J. 
1957 
R•1huhan.sh Lal 
v. 
T Ill 31at1 of U. P. 
698 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
(1957) 
interfering with the possession 
of the lady ; and it was 
ordered that 
the 
attachment 
should 
end 
and the 
possession of the

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