physical possession of the field in question, butthere is evidence on record to show that on the date of inddent the accused persons were ploughing the field. There is also evidence that two civil suits and one criminal case are already pending between the parties in relation to the field in question. From the evidence of the eyewitnesses and the medical evidence, it stands proved beyond all reasonable doubt that it is the accused/appellants who caused injuries to the deceased which ultimately resulted in his death and also voluntarily caused grievous hurt to Samaar Kunwar (PW-1 ). However, keeping in view the overall evidence, the defence taken by the accused/appellants in their statements under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. that the field in question belongs to them; the admission of PW-1 Samaar Kunwar in para-12 of her statement that earlier also on the report of the accused persons the deceased and his son were prosecuted for harvesting the crop of the said field; the fact that while the accused/appellants were working in the field, the complainant party armed with club and iron rod reached there, they tried to assault PW-3 Ramdhan as also the accused persons, it appears that the assault made by the accused/appellants on the deceased was in exercise of right of private defence of their property. At the same time, record also goes to show that the deceased suffered multiple injuries on various parts of the body, inciuding fracture of ribs and skull and the deceased is said to have died an instantaneous death. All this is indicative of the fact that the accused/appellants exceeded theirright of privatedefenceof property while assaulting the deceased, which is not permissible under the law. Keeping all these things in mind, this Court is of the opinion
