BANSIDHAR DAS Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the accused is directed against the judgment dated 01.12.2000, passed by the Sessions Judge, Keonjhar, in S.T. Case No. 170 of 1996, holding him guilty under Section 302 Indian Penal Code & convicting him thereunder.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the accused & the deceased are uterine brothers & living separately in mess & property. Both of them have lands at Badabilchaka, which they possessed separately after division amongst them. On 17.06.1996, in the early morning, Gananath Das, son of the deceased, had been to plough land which has fallen to the share of his father. The accused Bansidhar with a spade was engaged in cutting the ridge of the land under his possession. Deceased Hiranya after some time came to the land to see its condition. While the work was going on, at about 8.30 A.M., Bidyapati Das, son of Gananath Das, came with tiffin for his father. While Gananath was taking tiffin, deceased Hiranya went near the accused, who was cutting the ridge with a spade in his hand & asked him not to cut the ridge. There was altercation between them & Gananath after finishing his tiffin went near them to persuade his uncle Bansidhar (accused) not to quarrel. At that time, accused Bansidhar dealt a blow with the sharp side of the spade to the head of Hiranya. Seeing this, Gananath rushed towards the accused & before Bansidhar could give the second blow, he snatched away the spade from the accused. In course of tussle over the spade, Gananath sustained injuries on his head & both his hands. Accused Bansidhar, leaving the spade in the hand of the Gananath, ran towards the nearby jungle. Injured Hiranya was brought to Bamebari Out -Post by Gananath with his other brother & F.I.R. was lodged by Gananath, who also produced the weapon of offence, i.e. the spade. After lodging of the F.I.R., Hiranya was sent to the Central Hospital, Joda, where he was admitted & treated as an indoor patient & during treatment, he succumbed to the injuries on 17.06.1996 at 06.15 P.M.

(3.) THE plea of the accused was one of complete denial. The accused, during trial, had taken the plea of right of private defence & while admitting the injuries on the deceased, it had been pleaded that it was a case of accident in course of tussle over the spade & that the accused had no intention to kill the deceased.