Game Of Dice & Subsequent Humiliation Of Draupadi Set Stage For Kurukshetra War: Orissa High Court While Altering Conviction In 1994 Murder Case

The Orissa High Court has altered the conviction in a murder case that was the result of passing lewd comments to a girl during the video show in a village followed by the family members of the girl escalated into an uncalled tragic scenario of her father’s murder.

A Criminal Appeal was filed by the accused persons before the Court, challenging their conviction by the Trial Court under Sections 302 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

A Division Bench of Justice S.K. Sahoo and Justice Chittaranjan Dash remarked, “A trivial incident of passing lewd comments to a girl during video show in the village followed by protest by the family members of the girl members of the girl escalated into an uncalled for tragic scenario of murder of girl’s father. Glaring examples are there in scripture when the game of dice and subsequent humiliation of Draupadi stood out as a pivotal incident that irrevocably set the stage for Kurukshetra War.”

The Bench added that it is crucial to discern which minor disagreements have the potential to escalate so that it can be addressed early which would prevent them from snowballing into more significant conflicts or resentment, impacting relationships or broader social systems.

Advocate Devashis Panda appeared for the Appellants/Accused while Additional Government Advocate (AGA) Jateswar Nayak appeared for the Respondent/State.

Factual Background

The Appellants along with 64 other accused persons faced trial for the commission of offences under Sections 147, 148, 337, 149, and 302 of the IPC. It was alleged that in August 1994, they were the members of unlawful assembly and committed the offence of rioting being armed with deadly weapons and in prosecution of the common object, they pelted brickbats so rashly and negligently as to endanger human life. They allegedly caused hurt to three persons and killed one man (deceased).

The Trial Court while acquitting the other accused persons of all the charges, found the Appellants (seven in number) guilty. One of them died and hence, they were six number. They were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. As per the prosecution case, the murder was due to an incident involving passing of some lewd comments by one of the Appellants to a girl during a video show in the village. A meeting was convened to settle the matter but due to the quarrel, the matter could not be resolved. Being aggrieved by their conviction, the Appellants approached the High Court.

Reasoning

The High Court in view of the facts and circumstances of the case, observed, “From the evidence and circumstances of the case and the ratio laid down in the aforesaid citations, we are of the view that the appellants do not appear to have had the intention causing the death of the deceased or even causing such bodily injury as was likely to cause death.”

The Court noted that they can at the best be attributed with the knowledge that their act was likely to cause death or to cause such bodily injury as was likely to cause death.

“We, therefore, alter the conviction of the appellants from section 302/149 of I.P.C. to section 304 Part-II I.P.C./149 of I.P.C. There are enough materials on record that the appellants were not only the members of unlawful assembly as defined under section 142 of I.P.C., but they have used force or violence in prosecution of the common object of such assembly and thus committed offence of rioting as defined under section 146 punishable under section 147 of I.P.C. and they were armed with deadly weapons and thus there is no error in the impugned judgment of the learned trial Court in convicting the appellants under sections 147 and 148 of I.P.C.”, it held.

The Court took note of the fact that the Appellants have remained in custody for a period of five years and are now aged between 55-60 years and that no adverse report has been produced against any of them though they are on bail for more than 25 years.

“The occurrence in question took place in in the year 1994 and in the meantime, more than 30 years have passed. Therefore, we are of the view that no useful purpose would be served in sending the appellants to custody again. Keeping in view all the facts and circumstances of the case, while altering the conviction of the appellants from Section 302/149 to Section 304 Part-II I.P.C./149 of I.P.C., the sentence of imprisonment is directed to be reduced to the period already undergone”, it directed and concluded.

Accordingly, the High Court partly allowed the Appeal, altered the conviction from Sections 302 and 149 IPC to Sections 304 Part-II and 149 IPC, and reduced the sentence to the period already undergone.

Cause Title- Dinabandhu Dehury & Ors. v. State of Odisha (Case Number: CRA No.02 of 1998)

Click here to read/download the Judgment