Dr. RAM MANOHAR LOHIYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW ACADEMIC SESSION: 2017 – 18 18
INDIAN PENAL CODE CASE COMMENT: K N MEHRA VS STATE OF RAJASTHAN
SUBMITTED TO:
SUBMITTED BY:
MR. MALAY PANDEY
ADITI VATSA
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR (LAW)
ROLL NO. 7, SECTION A
Dr. RMLNLU, LUCKNOW
B.A. LL.B (H), SEM V
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to thank my Indian Penal Code professor, Mr. Malay Pandey for his infallible support and guidance all through the course of this project. This endeavour would not have been in its present shape had he not been there whenever I needed his guidance. Also I would like to extend my sincere thanks to the library staff of Madhu Limaye Library for always helping me out with finding excellent books and material and for their co operation. Last but surely not the least- I would like to thank my fellow students for their timely critical analysis of my work and special feedback that worked towards the betterment of this work.
Title of the project Case Comment: K N Mehra v State of Rajasthan
Bench Strength The bench in the present case is a division bench comprising three judges namely, B. Jagannadhadas, J., Syed Jafer Imam, J. and P. Govinda Menon, J.
Majority/ Minority The honorable bench, in the present case, delivered a unanimous opinion in favour of the Respondent i.e., the State of Rajasthan.
Facts: The facts of the present case have been summarized in points below:
1. The present case deals mainly with Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code which talks about theft. The alleged theft was that of an aircraft which belonged to the government (Indian Air Force Academy). Two cadets, named K. N. Mehra and M. Z. Phillips were undergoing training in the Indian Air Force Academy in Jodhpur. Phillips had been discharged from the Academy, on grounds of misconduct on 13 th May, 1952. On 14 th of May, he was supposed to leave Jodhpur by train. 2. K. N. Mehra was due for flight in an aircraft called Dakota, along with Om Prakash, a flying cadet as part of his training on 14 th of May, 1952. The said flight was to take off between 6 am and 6:30 am. On the said morning i.e. 14th May, Mehra and Phillips took off in a Harvard HT-822 instead of a Dakota before the prescribed time at 5 am. They did this without any kind of authorization and without observing any formalities which are pre-requisites for an aircraft flight. 3. They landed at a place in Pakistan about 100 miles away from the IndoPakistan border on the same day at around forenoon. On 16 th May, 1953, at around 7 am, they contacted one J. C. Kapoor who was military advisor to the Indian High Commissioner in Pakistan at Karachi. They informed him that they had lost their way and had to force-land in a field and that they had left the plane on the same spot. They then, requested his help tp go back to Delhi. 4. The Indian High Commissioner arranged for both of them to be sent back to Delhi in another plane and also arranged for the Harward aircraft to be sent back to Jodhpur. While they were on their way, the plane was stopped at Jodhpur and the two of them, K. N. Mehra and M. Z. Phillips were arrested and prosecuted for the offence of theft.
Law on the Point:
Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 23 Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 24 Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC) - Section 378 Indian Penal Code 1860, (IPC)- Section 379
Issues Involved:
The main question of law faced by the court in the present case as appears from questioning of the trial of the Magistrate was that whether Mehra, along with his coaccused Phillips, stole the aircraft Harvard HT-822 and flew with it to Pakistan with dishonest intention. It was to be found whether the accused would be held liable for the offence of theft under Section 378 of the Indian Penal Code.
Decision on the Law Laid Down: Honorable High Court of Rajasthan, concurred with the findings of the Trial Court and held that the accused would be liable for theft in the instance case. There is no scope for doubt in the instant case that though the ultimate purpose of the flight was to go to Pakistan, the use of the aircraft for that purpose and for unlawful gain of that use to the appellant and the consequent loss to the Government is considered to be intentional. This can be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case itself. The conviction of the accused under Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code was therefore considered to be right.
Critical Analysis: The facts of this case are very clear and untouched by ambiguity. Not much careful scrutiny is required by any person to draw out the counters. The accused, K N Mehra, along with M. Z. Phillips stole away the aircraft Harvard HT 822 and flew away with it to Pakistan with dishonest intention. The argument that the defence took was Mehra went to the aerodrome at the usual time with Phillips and flew the aircraft for sometime. Due to bad weather and visibility they turned the aircraft back to what they thought was the Jodhpur base. Upon finding the petrol near exhaustion, they force-landed on a field which, on enquiry, they came to know was in the Pakistan territory. It has been said by the learned counsel for the appellant, that Kapoor, the military advisor to the Indian High Commissioner in Pakistan himself gave evidence that the accused wanted to fly back to Delhi with a view to contact the higher authorities there. The main question to be determined in this scenario was whether the flight was an intentional one to Pakistan.
