Lunvir Tharan and Others vs The State

This is an appeal by five out of twelve accused, who were charged with offences under Sections 148, 447, 324, and 326 read with Section

149, Penal Code. The learned Judge baa convicted these five accused, and acquitted the rest giving benefit of doubt to some of them.

This is one of those cases of mutual ''Maramari'', in which both aides receive injuries, and each side alleges that the other was the aggressor. In

such cases it is for the Court to find out which side acted on the aggressive, and if there is definite evidence that one of the sides must have acted

on the aggressive and came with a common intention to tight, the question as to which of the accused inflicted the injuries on the members of the

other aide and with what weapons, does not become material.

In the present case the learned Judge has come to the conclusion that it was the accused''s party which acted on the offensive, and we think that

his conclusion is correct. The blood marks in the field of the complainant Visaman clearly show that it was in his field that the ''Maramari'' took

place. There is the Panchnama of the accused''s field in which there are traces of a fight but that is not definite, and the Panchnama with regard to

the complainant''s field clearly shows that the traces of the fight are more clearly visible in the complainant''s field.

As regards the motive also it is quite clear that Tharan, who is one of the principal accused, wanted to recover the land in question from the

complainant Visaman, and therefore, it is not unnatural that bis party might have entered into Visaman''s field, and inflicted injuries on his men. The

accused''s patty has no doubt received some injuries, but it is proved that some of the members of the accused''s party were armed with swords

and sticks, and the complainant''s party also received serious injuries. [Their Lordships reviewed the evidence and continued.] We are, therefore,

of the opinion that the conviction of the accused on this evidence is correct. It very often happens that in such cases it is very difficult to get definite

evidence, because in ''Maramari'' cases, it is only the members of the two opposite parties, who are present on the scene of the offence, but in the

present case, the two witnesses Devdan and Jiva, who have got their field adjacent to the complainant''s field, happened to be present and to

witness the ''Maramari'', and it is because of their evidence that we think that the prosecution has established their case against the appellants. In

our opinion, therefore, the conviction of these accused is justified. The appeal is dismissed.