BABAJI SETH AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 26.03.1983 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sambalpur in S.T. No. 70/11 of 1982, whereby Appellant No. 1 has been convicted under Section 325 and 323 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years for the offence Under Section 325 IPC and R.I. for three months for the offence Under Section 323 IPC, the sentences to run concurrently; Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 have been convicted under Section 325 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for five years each; and Appellant No. 4 has been convicted under Sections 304 and 326 IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for eight years for the offence Under Section 304 IPC and R.I. for four years for the offence Under Section 326 IPC, the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in a nutshell is that Gobardhan Mahakud (P.W. 13) purchased the disputed land from accused -Appellant No. 1, Babaji Seth, by a registered sale deed. On 11.11.1980 while Gobardhan Mahakud was reaping paddy crop from the disputed land with the help of his relations and labourers, the accused persons came there being armed with deadly weapons like bow and arrows, tangi, axe, iron rod, lathis, etc., and challenged the deceased Chandra Mahakud. Accused -Appellant No. 1, Babaji Seth, shot an arrow at Chandra Mahakud which did not hit him. Thereafter, accused -Appellant No. 4, Bharat Seth dealt tangi blows on his legs, due to which he fell down with severe bleeding injuries and other accused persons also assaulted him there. At that time, Prafulla Kampa (P.W. 11), who was passing by, saw the assault on Chandra Mahakud. When he came and protested, accused -Appellant No. 1, Babaji Seth shot an arrow at him, which hit his belly. While P.W.11 was running away, accused -Appellant No. 4, Bharat Seth dealt a tangi blow and accused -Appellant No. 3, Dasarath @ Suru Seth dealt an axe blow due to which he fell down and the other accused persons also assaulted him. The incident was informed to Padmalochan (P.W.2), the brother of Prafulla, who came to the spot and took Prafulla for treatment. Padmalochan reported the matter to the police and after due investigation charge -sheet was submitted against the accused persons.

(3.) IN order to prove its case, prosecution examined as many as 18 witnesses including the injured and proved 29 documents. The defence has examined only one witness and proved two exhibits.