The single-judge bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court held that it must be shown that the incriminating act was done to accomplish the common object of the unlawful assembly. It must be within the knowledge of other members that the offense is likely to be committed in the prosecution of the common object. If such a requirement is satisfied, they would be held liable Under Section 149 of I.P.C.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the complainant and her brother-in-law got Ac.0.10 cents of property each and the elders of their village asked them to give Ac.0.20 cents of property belonging to them for maintenance of Goddess Durgamma Temple. The complainant objected to the same and while the complainant and her brother-in-law were watering the coconut trees, A1to A7, along with other sixty Sangam members, arrived. They abused them and used foul language; A-2 dragged her by catching her hair, A-1 pushed her by placing his hands on her chest, and A-4 and other people took out twenty-five coconut saplings and threw them into the Godavari River.
The police registered the crime for the offenses punishable under Sections 147, 447, 427, 323, 354, and 509 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. However, later on, the charge sheet was filed in which 354 of I.P.C was deleted. Thereafter, the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class took cognizance against accused No.1 under Section 354 of I.P.C and against accused Nos.2 to 7 under Section 354 r/w 34 of I.P.C. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners (accused no. 5 and 6) filed the present criminal petition.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble Court observed that as seen from the charge sheet it is clear that there isn't a specific allegation made against accused Nos. 5 and 6 about their alleged commission of an act punishable under Section 354 of the I.P.C., which offends the complainant’s modesty.
It was furthermore observed that under I.P.C. Sections 141 and 149 of I.P.C., whenever five or more persons commit a crime with a common object and intent, then each of them would be liable for the commission of such offense. It must be demonstrated that the incriminating act was carried out in order to achieve the shared objective of the unlawful assembly. Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code stipulates that members shall be held accountable if they have knowledge that the offense is likely to be committed in furtherance of the common objective.
It was noted that the object of the accused is to obtain land, which belongs to the complainant and her brother-in-law for the maintenance of the goddess Durgamma temple, and in the scramble, accused-2 pushed the 2nd respondent/defacto-complainant putting his hands on her chest.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the view that the learned magistrate had erroneously taken cognizance against the accused Nos.5 and 6 and quashed Section 354 r/w 34 of I.P.C against petitioners.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court allowed the criminal petition.
Case no.: CRIMINAL PETITION No.209 OF 2019
Corum: Hon’ble Mr Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com:
Picture Source :
