MINAKETAN BHOI Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter was listed on 11-2-2003 for consideration of prayer for bail. Counsel for both parties agreed that they have no objection if the main appeal is heard on merit because, according to them, the scope of the appeal is limited. In view of such submission, we heard the appeal on merit on 11-2-2003 as well as today.

(2.) The appellant stands convicted under Section 302, IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 500.00, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month.The appellant and his father Arjuna were placed on trial under Sections 302/323/34, IPC for committing murder of Panchu Bhoi and causing hurt to his son Gobardhan (P.W. 3) in furtherance of their common intention. The learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted appellant's father Arjuna of both the charges and convicted the appellant as stated above.

(3.) The case of the prosecution is that on 26-7-1992 at about 6.30 a.m. Chakanayan (P.W. 1) with his brother Gobardhan (P.W. 3) and father-Panchu (hereinafter referred to as 'the deceased') had gone to their land to carry on cultivation. In course of ploughing, they found that the ridge of their land adjacent to the land of the appellant had been cut, for which, the deceased shouted at accused Arjuna (since acquitted), who was in his land at that time. There ensued a quarrel between the deceased and his sons on one hand and Arjuna on the other. In course of such quarrel, Arjuna assaulted Gobardhan (P.W. 3) with a stick. When the deceased protested, the appellant dealt a blow with the yoke on the head of the deceased, due to which he fell down and lost his sense. The appellant and his father thereafter fled away from the place of occurrence. The deceased was taken to Bhatli P.H.C. from where he was shifted to V. S. S. Medical College, Burla in serious condition. On the same date at about 9.30 a. m. P.W. 1 lodged oral report at Bhatli P.S. which was reduced to writing by the C.I.C. and treated the same as FIR under Sections 307/323/34, IPC. After the death the case was converted to one under Section 302, IPC. The plea of the appellant although was one of denial, but from the trend of cross-examination, it appears that he tried to put up a case of private defence of the body.