SANTOSH MAHTO Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) On the 12th June, 1976 corresponding to 25th Jaistha, 1383 B.S. in the morning there was an occurrence over the possession of a piece of land at Maryarbaid within Mouza Kapistha, during which several persons on either side were injured and out of the injured, two persons, Iswar Majhi and Moriram Mahato died. Pursuant to the complaint lodged by Lakhindar Majhi, P.W. 1 on the same date at Kashipur Police Station within district-Purulia, S.I. of Police Bimal Kumar Gorai, P.W. 29, took up the investigation of the case and after inspection of the place of occurrence, seizure of some articles, examination of witnesses and arrest of some of the accused, he submitted charge sheet against 31 accused, who were eventually placed on trial to answer the charges under Sections 148, 302/149 and 326/149, Indian Penal Code. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Purulia, by his judgment and order date 5th February, 1980, acquitted 27 accused of all the charges but found Santosh Mahato, Byakaran alias Haripada Mahato, Bisweswar alias Bishu Majhi, Lakhu alias Lechu Majhi, guilty of the offence punishable under Section 304 - Part I read with Section 34, Indian Penal Code and sentenced each of them to suffer R.I. for seven years. The said four convicts are the appellants before us.

(2.) The case of the prosecution was that on 12.6.1976 in the morning, on receipt of an information that Ramchand and his men were plough ing the disputed land, the complainant party led by Iswar Majhi, Mariram and others went there and protested which was followed by altercation between the parties. It is alleged that all of a sudden the accused persons armed with bows, arrows, lathis, tang is and swords came out of the hide outs and attacked the complainant party with the arms in their hands. The informant Lakhindar, P.W. 1, Sohan, P.W. 5, Nemai, P.W. 8, Dukhu Majhi, Baruni Mahato, P.W. 9, Ajit Mahato, P.W. 11, and others were injured and while they were escaping towards west, they were surrounded by the assailants on the southern ridge of Mahesh Maji's land. Mariram and Iswar Majhi were severely assaulted by the appellants and accused Janaki, since acquitted, with tang is, and sword as a result of which Mariram died on the spot and Iswar succumbed to the injuries on his way to the hospital. The other injured were removed to the hospital. As stated earlier, Lakhindar P.W. 1, with the injuries on his person went to the Police Station and lodged the complaint at 8/025 A.M. on the same day. The defence of the accused was that Ramchand, father of appellant Santosh, has been possessing the Mariyar I said land since hisT purchase in 1955 and that his possession has been upheld in a criminal proceeding under Section 145, Cr. P.C. It was alleged that on 12.6.1976 in the morning while Ramchand, Santosh and 4/5 others were engaged in ploughing the disputed land and sowingseeds the complainant party led by Iswar Majhi, Mariram find 22/25 others armed with deadly weapons forcibly obstructed the act of cultivation and while the appellants and others were trying to flee away they were chased by the complainant party and assaulted. They pleaded innocence and denied the material allegations of the prosecution case of rioting and murder.

(3.) The land in Mariyar Baid within MouzaKapista is situated to the east of village Dhabari. To the west of Mariyar Baid is the land of one Maheswar Majhi intervened by the land of Tushu Majhi. There was scramble for possession in respect of Plot Nos. 129 and 130 of the said Mariyar Baid for sometime and the parties were litigating from before 1973 over the possession of the said land. It appears from the documentary evidence adduced by both the parties at the trial (vide Exts. 9, 911, 10 and C and C/I) that a criminal proceeding under Section 144, Cr. P.C. was started in 1973 at the instance of Santosh, son of Ramchand and others (1st party), against Rajaram Mahato and others (2nd party) over possession of Mariyar Baid land and in that proceeding which was later converted into one under Section 145, Cr. P.C. the possession of the 1st party was confirmed. Feeling aggrieved, the 2nd party moved in revision and within a few days from the filling of Criminal Revision, the occurrence, with which we are presently concerned, took place. Both the parties belong to the same village-Dhabari.