Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
S. Muralidhar, R.K. Pattanaik, JJ.
Raj Kishor Behera & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
CRLA No. 19 of 2004
Decided On : 23-08-2022
Indian Penal Code - Unlawful Assembly - Sections 302, 147, 149, 341, 324, 428 - Summary
Fact of the Case:
The case involved the conviction of accused persons for forming an unlawful assembly, wrongfully restraining and assaulting the deceased and his brother, ultimately resulting in the murder of the deceased. The prosecution's case rested on eyewitness testimonies and medical evidence.
Finding of the Court:
The trial Court found the accused guilty of forming an unlawful assembly, wrongfully restraining and assaulting the deceased, resulting in his murder. The Court relied on the consistent and trustworthy evidence of related witnesses, concluding that the accused were members of an unlawful assembly and had the intent to cause harm.
Issues: The issues addressed by the trial Court included the formation of an unlawful assembly, wrongful restraint, causing hurt, and the infliction of fatal injuries resulting in the death of the deceased.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court applied the legal provisions of the Indian Penal Code, particularly Sections 141, 143, 144, 146, and 149, to establish the guilt of the accused as members of an unlawful assembly and their liability for the actions of the assembly.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the accused, directing them to surrender and serve the remainder of their sentences.
JUDGMENT
Dr. S. Muralidhar, CJ. - This appeal is directed against an order dated 28th October 2003, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Deogarh in S.T. Case No.227/19 of 2002, convicting the Appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 147, 149, 341, 324, 428 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) sentencing each of them to undergo:
(i) Rigorous Imprisonment (RI) for life under Section 302 read with 149 of IPC,
(ii) RI for one year for the offence punishable under Section 147 of IPC,
(iii) Simple Imprisonment (SI) for 15 days for the offence punishable under Section 341/149 of IPC.
1. In addition, the co-accused Benudhar Behera was held guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 341/149 of IPC and 324/149 of IPC and the co-accused Ekadasia Penthei, Jagannath Behera, Purna Behera and Kalia@ Laxmidhar Behera were found guilty for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 341/149 IPC and 323/149 of IPC and sentenced to undergo one year R.I., S.I. for 15 days/ S.I. for six months. The substantive sentences of order against all the accused were directed to run concurrently.
The accused Budhu Penthei (Accused No.8) A-8 was acquitted of all the offences.
2. The present appeal has been filed by the two of the six convicted accused persons, i.e., Raj Kishor Behera (Appellant No.1) (A-4) and Ramani Behera (Appellant No.2) (A-5).
Case of the prosecution
3. The case of the prosecution is that on 1st March 2002, at around 8.15pm at village Ratnapur, District Deogarh, the eight accused persons formed an unlawful assembly and pursuant to their common object of such unlawful assembly, wrongfully restrained the deceased Biranchi Behera and his brother Rabi Behera. They are stated to have assaulted the said two persons and ultimately committed the murder of Biranchi Behera.
4. The case of the prosecution further is that the deceased and his brother Rabi Behera (PW-4) with certain others had grown watermelon at village Ratanpur and the respective cultivators were keeping a watch over it. On 28th February 2002 at midnight, the accused Ekadasia Penthei (A-7) entered the water-melon field of PW-4 for committing theft. This was however witnessed by Siba Pradhan (PW-1) and Belarsen Sahu (PW-3) at whose instance A-7 is stated to have fled away.
5. At 7 am the next morning, i.e., 1st March 2002, A-7 came to the PWs-1 and 3, i.e., Siba Pradhan (PW-1) and Belarsen Sahu (PW- 3) and rebuked them in an obscene language which was then brought under control by the deceased Biranchi Behera.
6. In the same night at around 8.15pm, when PW-4 was returning to his house from the watermelon field, all the accused persons being armed with lathis, tangia and knife wrongfully restrained and attacked him and he shouted for help. Hearing his cries, Biranchi Behera came running followed by his wife, Subasini (PW-2) and son, Pratap. PWs 1 and 3 also came running from the watermelon field.
7. On the intervention of Biranchi Behera, the accused Raj Kishor Behera (A-4) dealt an axe blow to him while the co-accused Ramani Behera (A-5) stabbed him by a knife while others assaulted him by lathis.
8. Later, Rabi Behera (PW-4) came to the rescue of Biranchi Behera but the accused Benudhar Behera (A-3) stabbed him by a knife. The deceased Biranchi Behera due to the axe and knife blows on his head and chest, sustained severe bleeding injuries and fell down. He was taken to the District Headquarters Hospital, Deogarh (DHH) where, in the course of treatment, he succumbed to the injuries the following morning, i.e., 2nd March, 2002. Thereafter, Rabi Behera (PW-4) lodged an FIR (Ext-2) before the Officer-in-Charge (OIC), Kundheigola Police Station, basing on which, the case was registered and investigation commenced.
9. B.K. Parida (PW-8), the OIC of Kundheigola PS rushed to the DHH, Deogarh where he conducted the inquest on the dead body of the deceased and after issuing command certificate and dead body chalan, despatched it for postmortem examination. He also visited the
The main legal point established in the judgment is the liability of members of an unlawful assembly under the Indian Penal Code, particularly the application of Sections 141, 143, 144, 146, and 149 ....
(1) Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – When repeated blows are inflicted on parietal and temporal regions with lathis, resulting in bone-deep lacerations causing fractures and brain damage a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 149 IPC to determine the common object of the unlawful assembly and the vicarious liability of the accused, as well as t....
The court clarified that participation in an unlawful assembly does not require each member to commit an overt act, and distinguished between intention and knowledge in culpable homicide cases.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to prove the constitution of an unlawful assembly and the applicability of vicarious liability under Section 149 of IPC.
The court affirmed the conviction under Sections 302 and 307 IPC, emphasizing the credibility of eyewitnesses and the common object of the accused in a fatal assault.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
