JUDGMENT : R.K. Patra, J. - Opposite party No. 1 was placed on trial to face charge u/s 302 I.P.C. in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal in S.T. No. 2-A of 1989 by judgment dated 24.8.1991 acquitted him of the charge u/s 302 I.P.C. but convicted him of the charge u/s 304 Part-I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. The Petitioner who was the informant has filed this revision challenging the aforesaid order acquitting opposite party No. 1 of the charge u/s 302 I.P.C.. 2. The case of the prosecution is that Brajabnadhu Sahu Bhagaban Sahu and Laxminarayan Sahu (deceased) are three brothers. Opposite party No. 1 is the Son of Brajabandhu. The deceased was working as Headmaster in Kulad N.R. School. There was partition of family properties between the three brothers. Their mother was allotted Ac. 1.80 of land for her maintenance. She was, however, staying unst of the time wither with Bhagaban (F.W. 14) or the deceased Laxminarayan. After her death about four years prier to the date of occurrence, Brajabandhu, father of opposite party No. 1, wanted to divide the landed properties of his mother which was objected to by the other brothers. Dispute thus areas between Brajabandhu and opposite party No. 1 on one side and the other the brothers on the other side. On 9.10.1988, the deceased Laxminarayan want to his land to plough it with his Helis. At about 12.30 p.m. the accused-apposite party No. 1 went there and stabbed him with a knife result, Laxminarayan died instantaneously at the spot. P.W. 4 lodged F.I.R. on he basis of which investigation was taken up and the opposite party No. 1 was placed on trial, as indicated above. 3. The plea of the opposite party No. 1 was one of denial. 4. Out of the 22 witnesses examined on behalf of the prosecution, P. W Section 1, 2, 15 and 16 (P. W Section 15 and 16 were declared hostile) were eye witnesses to the occurrence. P.Ws. 5, 19 and 20 were witnesses to the recovery of knife (M.O.I.) u/s 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. P.W. 13 was the doctor who conducted autospay on the dead-body. 5. On the basis of evidence of eye witnesses P.Ws. P.Ws. 5, 19 and 20 were witnesses to the recovery of knife (M.O.I.) u/s 27 of the Indian Evidence Act. P.W. 13 was the doctor who conducted autospay on the dead-body. 5. On the basis of evidence of eye witnesses P.Ws. 1 and 2, in paragraph 10 of the Judgment, the learned sessions Judge held that it was the apposite party No. 1 who killed the deceased. However, in paragraph 12 of the Judgment, he observed that he (opposite party No. 1 was the nephew of the deceased Laxminarayan and was quite young aged about 18 years at the time of occurrences. In paragraph 13 of the Judgment, the learned Sessions Judge further observed as follows: Considering the young age of the deceased and close relationship with the deceased I am inclined to held that this is not a case u/s 302 I.P.C. but a case u/s 304 Part-1 I.P.C. The accused may not have any intention to kill the deceased but he stabbed the deceased knowing fully well that such stabbing may result in these injuries and cause death... Accordingly, for the reasons indicated above, he held the opposite party No. 1 guilty u/s 304 Part-l I.P.C.and convicted thereunder and sentenced his to undergo rigorous imprisonment for there years and acquitted him of the charge u/s 302 I.P.C. 6. It may be noted here that the opposite party No. 1 has not challenged the aforesaid finding of guilt recorded u/s 304, Part-I, I.P.C. As such, the said finding of guilt has become final. 7. The limited question that arises for consideration is whether the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the opposite party No. 1 of the charge u/s 302 I.P.C. on valid and legal grounds. The doctor (P.W. 13) When conducted the postmortem examination on the dead-body of the deceased found the following injures: 1. One incised wound 3 c.m.x 1.5 c.x. 5 c.m. deep subcutaneously ever the front chest below the right nipple. 2. Incised wound 2.5 c.m. x 1 c.m. x 3 c.m. deep over the left supra clavicular fess. 3. Incised wound 3 c.m. x 1.5 over the left infraclavicular region penetrating into the left thoracic cavity. 4. Incised wound 2 c.m. x 0.5. c.m. over the auxiliary region' penetrating into the left thoracic cavity. 5. 2. Incised wound 2.5 c.m. x 1 c.m. x 3 c.m. deep over the left supra clavicular fess. 3. Incised wound 3 c.m. x 1.5 over the left infraclavicular region penetrating into the left thoracic cavity. 4. Incised wound 2 c.m. x 0.5. c.m. over the auxiliary region' penetrating into the left thoracic cavity. 5. Incised wound 2 c.m. x 1 c.m. below the left infrascapular region cutting through the left 7th rib and penetrating into the left thorace cavity. 6. Incised wound 3. c.m. x 1. c.m. x 6 c.m. deep subcutaneously ever the left deltoid region. 7. Incised would 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m.x 0.5 c.m. over the ventral aspect of the pulp of left middle finger. 8. Abrasion 4 c.m. x 3 c.m. over the right calf region. 9. Abrasion 4 c.m. x 4 c.m. over the left glutial region and abrasion4 c.m. x 3 c.m. over the right glutial region. 10. Abrasions 5 c.m. x 3 c.m., 4 c.m. x 4 c.m., 4 c.m.x 3 c.m. over the back of chest. On dissection, the doctor found the following internal injuries: 1. There is cleated blood inside the left thoracic cavity. 2. Left lung shows 3 incised wounds corresponding to the positions of external injury mentioned at serial Nos. 3, 4 and 5 above. 3. Heart is intact and empty of blood. he stated that the aforesaid injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 8. I am aware of the limitation of this Court while exercising revisional jurisdiction in a case filed by the informant against the order of acquittal. In this case, the impugned judgment suffers from grass illegality inasmuch as age of assailant is not a criterion to test whether opposite party No. 1 committed offence under Setion 302, I.P.C. or Section 304, Part-I, I.P.C. The learned Session Judge also clearly lest sight of the evidence of the doctor who categorically stated that the injuries unstained by the deceased ware sufficient in the ordinary course' of nature to cause death. Non-consideration of material evidence has vitiated the judgment so far as it relates to acquittal of opposite party No. 1 of the charge u/s 302, I.P.C. which calls for interference by this Court. 9. Non-consideration of material evidence has vitiated the judgment so far as it relates to acquittal of opposite party No. 1 of the charge u/s 302, I.P.C. which calls for interference by this Court. 9. In the result, the impugned judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge are hereby set aside so far as it relates to the acquittal of the apposite party No. 1 of the charge u/s 302 I.P.C. The matter is remitted to the learned Sessions Judge for consideration of the point if the offence committed by the opposite party No. 1 comes within the purview of Section 302 I.P.C.. He will hear the prosecution and opposite party No. 1 and despise of the matter according to law by the end of April, 2000 without being influenced by any observation made by me in this order. 10. I.C.R. be sent back forthwith.