Citations: Abdullah Vs Emperor, AIR 1919 All 307: (1919) 17 ALJR 200

Date of Judgement: 11/01/1919

Equivalent citations: 49 Ind Cas 776

Case No.: N/A

Case Type: Criminal Appeal

Appellant: Abdullah

Respondent: Emperor

Bench: Justice J. Lindsay

Court: The Privy Council

Statutes Referred:

  • The Indian Penal Code, 1801; Section 153, 298

Facts:

  • A Cow get killed by the applicant, some distance away from Allahabad before sunrise.
  • One or Two Muhammadans observed that and send a Chaukidar to make a complaint.
  • Police took cognizance of the complaint and sent the accused for trial under Section 298 of the Indian Penal Code.
  • The Court concluded that offence was committed under Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code.
  • Abdullah accepted his accusation.

Issue Involved:

  • Whether Abdullah be convicted of killing a cow?
  • Whether the offence under the definition of Section 153 is proved?
  • Whether there was malice or wantonness on the part of Abdullah?

Contention of Appellant:

  • Abdullah admitted his crime.
  • He stated that he was driving to take the cow to the slaughterhouse, on the way the cow falls and broke its legs. He was therefore obliged to put it to death.

Contention of Respondent:

  • Some Muhammadans observed the act of killing the cow by Abdullah.
  • It hurts the religious feeling of the Hindu community.
  • The respondents argued that after the act by the accused the village would get a bad name.

Ratio Decidendi:

  • The Privy Council observed that there was no attention paid to the definition of Section 153 especially on the particular words, “malignantly” or wantonly”.
  • The court noticed that the accused killed the cow when there was no Hindu present, whose religious feelings would be wounded.
  • The court disposed of the application as there was no evidence of malice or wantonness on the part of the accused, and directed that the accused be acquitted and released.

Judgement:

  • According to the ocular evidence the court accepted that Abdullah has killed the cow but because of certain reasons. Therefore, the offence didn’t get cover under any Act.
  • It is sufficient for the purpose of disposing of this application to say that there being no evidence of malice or wantonness on the part of the accused the conviction is bad in law.

The appeal is dismissed and the accused is directed to be acquitted and released.

Conclusion:

The court allows the application and set aside the conviction and sentence and directed the accused to be acquitted and released as the definition of Section 153 of the Indian Penal Code was not completely fulfilled and the religious feeling of Hindu didn’t get hurt because they were not present at the spot at the time, when the offence got committed.

Drafted by: Mumuksha Singh, University of Rajasthan, Five-year Law College.

Edited by: Aashima Kakkar, Associate Editor, Law Insider

Published On: November 13, 2021 at 16:05 IST

Related Post