Vishnudeo Narayan, J.- This appeal has been directed by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 4.1.1990 passed in Sessions Trial No. 218 of 1988 by Shri S.K.P. Verma, 7th Additional District Judge, Dhanbad whereby and whereunder the appellant was found guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and he was convicted and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life.

2. The prosecution case has arisen on the basis of the fardbeyan (Ext.-1) of P.W.1, Dulali Rajwarin, the informant, recorded on 16.9.1985 at 10.30 hours in Chaitudih Colliery Siding; Dhanbad regarding the occurrence which is said to have been taken place on that very day at 9 hours.

3. According to the prosecution case, P.W.1, the informant, was on duty from 8 hours on 16.9.1985 in Chaitudih Siding and Shiv Kumar Singh, the Attendance Clerk, the deceased of this case, was seen from going towards east from west in the said Siding and Nirmala Devi, the mother of the appellant was going towards west from east and thereafter said Shiv Kumar Singh and Nirmala Devi went together talking in the attendance room. It is alleged that after some time i.e. at about 9 A.M., the informant saw the elder son of Nirmala Devi fleeing towards west and Shiv Kumar Singh aforesaid besmeared with blood was found chasing him and in course of chase the said Shiv Kumar Singh fell down. It is also alleged that Nirmala Devi was found fleeing towards north. The prosecution case further is that the informant along with P.W.2, Sumati Nuniyani went to Shiv Kumar Singh who told them that the elder son of Nirmala Devi had fled away after assaulting him by Bhujali and thereafter said Shiv Kumar Singh became unconscious. On alarms several persons including Sitwa Devi and Majid Khan came there and Shiv Kumar Singh was brought to the Central Hospital Tilatand on dumpher but he died in the way to the hospital.

4. The appellant has pleaded not guilty to charge levelled against him and claimed himself to be innocent and to have been falsely implicated in the case. His defence in the alternative is that in exercise of the right of private defence of the person of his mother Nirmala Devi he has assaulted the deceased while he was attempting to commit rape on his mother.

5. The prosecution has examined P.W.1, Dulali Rajwarin, the informant, P.W.2, Sumati Nuniyani, P.W.4, Dr. R. S. Prasad, who has conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased of this case, P.W.3, Ram Nand Singh, the I.O. of this case, P.W.S, Mathura Pandey, a formal witness, P.W.6, Shambhu Prasad Singh, a witness of the inquest and P.W.7, Suresh Singh, a tender witness to substantiate the prosecution case. Exhibit 5 is a post mortem report of P.WA, Exhibit3 is the inquest report and Exhibit-4/1 is the seizure list of the articles found at the place of the occurrence and Exhibit-4 is the production list in respect thereof and Exhibit-6 series are signatures of the witnesses on the inquest report. No witness was examined on behalf of the defence. However, para-25 of the case diary which is the statement of Nirmala Devi aforesaid has been marked as Exhibit-A and Exhibit-B is the F.I.R. under Section 354 I.P.C. of Nirmala Devi regarding the occurrence of that very date lodged against Shiv Kumar Singh aforesaid. In view of the oral and documentary evidence on the record, the learned court below; disbelieving the right of private defence of the appellant, found him guilty for the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and convicted and sentenced him as stated above.

6. Assailing the impugned judgment it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the learned court below has not rightly construed the defence version of the appellant in view of the fact that there was absolutely no cause or motive for commission of the murder of the deceased by the appellant except the fact that the deceased was attempting to ravish his mother and in this view of the matter, the defence of the appellant