JUDGMENT P.G. Agarwal, J 1. The accused-appellant Sri Nikhil Ch. Nath alongwith three others were tried by the Sessions Judge, Cachar, Silchar in Sessions Case No. 86 of 1997 for commission of an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. During trial, as many as 9 witnesses were examined by the prosecution and on conclusion of the trial learned sessions Judge acquitted the three other accused persons on benefit of doubt but convicted the accused appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentenced him to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000 in default to further imprisonment for two months and hence, the present appeal. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 3.1.1997 at about 8.30 A.M., while the deceased Sadhan Kanta Nath was returning from the house of Rahamat Ali and reached near the house of the accused persons, the accused persons assaulted with him lathi etc. and present appellant assaulted him with an axe as a result of which Sadhan Kanta Nath sustained injuries on his person and died on the spot. It may be mentioned here that the other accused persons who were acquitted by the Court are the father and two brothers of the present accused appellant Nikhil Nath. In this case, there is oral evidence on record as regards the death of Sadhan Nath on the day of occurrence as result of injuries sustained by him. The deceased was serving as a Home Guard and at the relevant time he had returned to the village only. PW 8 Dr. K.K. Chakraborty who held autopsy on the dead body and found the following injuries on the persons of the deceased : "Injuries 1. Cut injury on the left side of the chin along the lower border of mandible measuring 5 x 2 cm x bone deep. 2. Cut injury 11/2 cm below the injury No. 1 measuring 3 x 11/2 cm 3. Cut injury on the right side of the neck along the medial end of right clavicle measuring 5 x 3 cm with cut in clavicle vessels and muscles of the neck cut. 4. Cut injury on the right side of the occipital region of the scalp measuring 51/2 cm x 3 cm upto the bone with cut in occipital bone. 5. 4. Cut injury on the right side of the occipital region of the scalp measuring 51/2 cm x 3 cm upto the bone with cut in occipital bone. 5. Cut injury on the back of right elbow measuring 6 cm x 2 cm x bone deep with cut in upper end of radius and ulna. 6. Cut injury in front of the right thigh in upper end 5 x 2 x 1/2 cm. 7. Cut injury on the right thigh laterally in upper half measuring 21/2 x 1 x 1/2 cm. 8. Cut injury on the left thigh of the upper half and laterally measuring 6 x 2 x 2 cm. 9. Cut injury on the back of neck of left side measuring 5 x 2 x 3 cm with cut on 7th cervical vertebrae. 10. Cut injury on the back in lumber area 4 x 2 x 1 cm. 11. Cut injury in left gluteal region 5 x 2 x 2 cm. 12. All the injuries were fresh and ante mortem, caused by sharp weapons." 3. In the opinion of the doctor, the death was due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante mortem injuries described, caused by sharp weapons and homicidal in nature. The doctor has also opined that the above injury may be caused by the axe, material Ext. 1. 4. PW 3 Rohima Begum who has deposed that just prior to the occurrence, the deceased had gone to her house for borrowing a buffallo but she could not lend it. PW 1, Lakhyamoni Nath and Parvasini Nath, PW 5 are the father and mother of the deceased and they claimed to have seen the occurrence as their house is also situated near the house of accused person, where the incident took place. They have deposed about the assault made by the accused persons and categorically stated that three other accused persons assaulted the deceased with lathi and the accused appellant assaulted with an axe. As the doctor did not find , any injury caused by blunt weapon, the benefit was extended to other accused persons and they were acquitted. We, therefore, find that these two witnesses have tried to implicate the other accused persons by exaggerating their versions, but that cannot be a reason to disbelieve them. As the doctor did not find , any injury caused by blunt weapon, the benefit was extended to other accused persons and they were acquitted. We, therefore, find that these two witnesses have tried to implicate the other accused persons by exaggerating their versions, but that cannot be a reason to disbelieve them. In a case State of U.P. v. Anil Singh, reported in 1989 CLT 88 the Apex Court observed : "It is well to remember that there is a tendency amongst witnesses in our country to back up a good case by false or exaggerated version. It is also experienced that invariably the witnesses and embroidery to prosecution story, perhaps for the fear of being disbelieved. But, that is no ground to throw the case on a board, if true, in the main witness lodging report not specifically cross-examined regarding the matter-court can not foresee adverse to witness." 5. In this case, we find all the injuries received by the deceased were cut injuries and the accused is the only person who was carrying an axe. Besides PW 1 and PW 5, another independent witnesses Harish Ali (PW 6) had seen the occurrence and he had also deposed about the assault made by the accused appellant Nikhil with an axe whereupon, the deceased Sadhan fell down on the ground. Likewise PW 7 also saw the incident. The incident had taken place at broad day light an naturally several persons had seen the occurrence and they have deposed to that effect. Bipad Saha (PW 4), on the other hand, was present at the police station when the accused Nikhil came to the police station with an axe and the axe was handed over to the police which was seized and marked material Ext. 1. The trial court also relied on the testimony of the PW 4, the eye-witness and the post-crime conduct of the accused appellant, recovery of the weapon of the assault and in view of the medical evidence on record, we hold that it was the accused appellant Nikhil, who caused the death of the deceased. 6. Upon considering the evidence on record, which is cogent and inspire confidence, we concur with the finding of the trial court on the above count. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant has, however, submitted that the accused person took the plea of private defence. 6. Upon considering the evidence on record, which is cogent and inspire confidence, we concur with the finding of the trial court on the above count. 7. The learned counsel for the appellant has, however, submitted that the accused person took the plea of private defence. In his statement under Section 313 Cr. P.C., the accused person claimed that the deceased assaulted him with a dao and out of fear, in order to defend himself, he brandished the axe in his hand in order to save his life. Thereafter, some pushing and jostling with axe and dao was going on and ultimately, Sadhan fell down. The plea of private defence was raised for the first time by the accused person in the statement recorded under Section 313 Cr. P.C. No suggestion was given to the accused and from the cross-examination also we find no hints that the deceased had tried to assault the accused. The accused person caused as many as 11 cut injuries on the person of the deceased. But, surprisingly enough, the accused did not receive a scratch although he claimed to have been assaulted with dao and thereafter, pushing and jostling going on with the weapon in their hand. We are unable to accept this plea of private defence and rejust the same. 8. The next submission of the learned counsel for the accused appellant is that the accused was juvenile at the relevant time and as such, the trial by the learned Sessions Judge alongwith other major accused persons is illegal. The above plea was considered by the trial court and the trial court held that from the facial appearance of the accused, he seems to be more than 20 years of age. The school certificate produced by the accused is available on the record and the learned counsel was fair enough to submit that as per school certificate, the accused appellant was about 16 years 2 days old. Mr. Dey, however, submitted that during the pendency of criminal, appeal, the juvenile justice act has been amended and the age of the juvenile is increased to 18 years from 16 years. There is no dispute at the Bar that at the relevant time, the juvenile justice Act, 1987 was holding the field. Mr. Dey, however, submitted that during the pendency of criminal, appeal, the juvenile justice act has been amended and the age of the juvenile is increased to 18 years from 16 years. There is no dispute at the Bar that at the relevant time, the juvenile justice Act, 1987 was holding the field. So far the application of the juvenile justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 is concerned, the said Act was published in the Gazette dated December 30, 2000 only. Section 20 of the said Act of 2000 is very specific which reads as follows : "20. Special provision in respect of pending cases - Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, all proceedings in respect of a juvenile pending in any court in any area on the date on which this Act comes into force in that area, shall be continued in that court as if this Act had not been passed and if the court finds that the juvenile has committed an offence, it shall record such finding and instead of passing any sentence in respect of the juvenile, forward the juvenile to the Board which shall pass orders in respect of that juvenile in accordance with the provisions of this Act as if it had been satisfied on inquiry under this Act that a juvenile has committed the offence." 9. We therefore, hold, in view of the above, that the present case is governed by the earlier provisions of law and the accused appellant is not a 'juvenile'. 10. In view of what is stated above, we find no merit in this appeal and the appeal is accordingly, dismissed