Exception-4 of Section 300 IPC was central to the court's decision, allowing for the appellant's conviction to be reduced from murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder.

JUDGMENT :

S. Panda, J. - This Jail Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 17.07.2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal in Sessions Trial No.101 of 2001 in convicting the appellant for commission of offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- (one thousand) only, in default, to undergo R.I. for further three months.

2. The prosecution case, in brief is that the appellant, the deceased along with others were working as labourers in a brick kiln of one Keshaba Chandra Panda. The brick kiln was situated at Kalapal under Parjang Police Station in the district of Dhenkanal. All the? labourers used 'to stay in the huts near the kiln. 9th January 2001 was the occasion of Pausa Purnima. The Manager of the brick kiln distributed Rs. 25/- to each of the labourers to celebrate the occasion of Pausa Purnima on 9th January 2001. The Manager gave Rs. 50/- to the deceased asking him to keep his share of Rs. 25/- and give balance of Rs. 25/- to the appellant, as both the appellant and deceased were remaining in one hut. Since the deceased did not pay the amount of Rs. 25/- immediately to the appellant, the appellant dealt successive blows on the head and ear of the deceased by the handle of a spade, for which the deceased sustained injuries and consequently died. Thereafter on the basis of the FIR lodged by the Manager of the brick kiln, the case was registered. After completion of investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the appellant finding sufficient evidence against him to have committed offence under Section 302, I.P.C.

3. In order to bring home the charge, during trial, the prosecution examined as many as 11 witnesses and exhibited 17 documents. On the other hand, neither the defence has examined any witness nor exhibited any documents.

The appellant's defence plea was one of complete denial.

4. The learned Sessions Judge after threadbare discussion of the materials available on record, convicted the appellant for commission of the offence punishable under Section 302, IPC and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life.

5. Perused the L.C.R. and gone through the evidence on record carefully. It appears that the prosecution has basically founded its case on the basis of the statements of the eye witnesses, i.e. P.Ws. 10 and 11 who were then working as labourers, who specifically stated that both of them were sitting near the fire along with the deceased. The appellant came and dealt blows by the handle of a spade on the back side of the head of the deceased. P.W 10 has categorically stated that the deceased, the appellant and the labourers of the brick kiln are Adivasis, which has been corroborated by P.W.4.

P.W.1 was the Manager of the brick kiln, who in his examination-in-chief had stated that both the appellant and deceased were residing in one hut. He had given Rs. 50/- to the deceased and told him to give Rs. 25/- to the appellant. Since the deceased did not handover Rs. 25/- to the appellant, there was quarrel between them for which he intervened in the matter and settled the same. While he was in his office, one Sambaru Munda and his wife shouted that Arjuna Kisan-the appellant assaulted Banshi Kishan-the deceased by means of the handle of a spade. Hearing Sambaru, he rushed to the spot and found the injured succumbed to the injuries. He noticed bleeding injuries on the head and ear of the deceased. He went to the hut where both the deceased and appellant were residing. On being asked, the appellant stated that he had killed the deceased. He then lodged the FIR in Saranga Outpost under Parjang Police Station and the appellant was arrested by the police. In cross examination, he has stated that he had not seen the occurrence.

The other Prosecution Witnesses, such as P.Ws. 2, 3, 4 and 5 were Post Occurrence witnesses. They upon hearing the shout went to the spot and found that the deceased was lyin