Proceeding further, the Trial Court after discussing the case law on the point, held In the present case, the deceased party companymitted criminal trespass on the disputed land.
On the basis of this evidence the High Court came to the companyclusion that the appellant was guilty of murder.
When the accused objected the forcible ploughing of the disputed land by the deceased party, Bhikari Pradhan chased the accused by holding an axe.
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.6.79 of the Orissa High Court in Government Appeal No.
26 of 1976 Amlan Ghosh for the Appellant.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.814 of 1979.
There is numberdoubt that the deceased died a homicidal death.
The Trial Court on an appreciation of PWs 1, 5 to 7 companycluded as under Thus the truth seems to be that when Bhikari Pradhan and PWs 1 and 5 to 7 criminally trespassed into the disputed land ad Bhikari Pradhan took the dominant role in taking his two pairs of bullocks and 2 hired laborers, PWs 5 and 7 and ploughing the disputed land, the accused party went there to plough the same and when the accused objected Bhikari Pradhan raised an axe at the accused who whirled the stick which struck on the head of Bhikari Paradhan who injured and fell down on the ground and was subsequently taken to Harichandanpur hospital where he was found dead.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by AHMADI, J. The appellant was tried for the murder of Bhikari Pradhan.
It is against the said order of companyviction and sentience that the present appeal is preferred.
K.Mehta for the Respondent.
