CHAKRA BEHERA Vs. BALAKRUSHNA MOHAPATRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE five petitioners were convicted under Section 298 I. P. C. and sentenced to a fine of Rs. 15/- each by the S. D. M. of Talcher, on the allegation that with the deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of the villagers in Kandhala alias Ramchandrapur they offered Balis and worshipped two of the deities, namely, brahmani Dei and Pitabali Dei on inauspicious days.

(2.) THE aforesaid deities were established in the village long ago and it appears that the descendants of the original Brahmin families who were brought here from puri claimed a special right to manage the affairs of the said deities. It was also alleged that according to a long standing tradition and custom, animal sacrifices used to take place before the said deities only twice a year, once in the month of chaitra and again in the month of Bhadrab. The actual dates for performing animal sacrifices were also fixed by the Brahmins after discussion in a Sabha. It was further alleged that the dates as fixed by the Brahmins in the Sabha were final and no other villager was entitled to fix any other date, in pursuance of this age-old practice Bali was offered before the deities on the 20th August 1960 which was the suspicious day fixed by the Brahmins in the Sabha, but the petitioners wanted permission to offer Bali on another date, namely, 31-8-61 as there was Gomadak (cattle epidemic disease) in the village and they wanted to propitiate the deities. The Brahmin priests refused as it was against the custom. It was alleged that being dissatisfied with the decisions of the Brahmins, the petitioners offered Bali before the said deities on 31-8-61 with the help of petitioner Chakra who acted as the priest and then they poured the Bali blood on the deities.

(3.) THE learned Magistrate held that though the motive of the petitioners in thus offering Bali to the deities on a wrong date through a different priest might have been bona fide, nevertheless their action amounted to deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of the other villagers, and hence he held them guilty under Sec. 298 I. P. C.