JUDGMENT

G.N. Ray, J.-These appeals arise out of the common judgment dated October 11, 1985 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur in D.B, Criminal Appeal No. 788 of 1974. D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 64 of

1975 and D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 819 of 1975 assailing the judgment dated December 7,1974 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Churu by which the appellant Balbir Singh, Yashin, Duli Chand and Mohan were convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge under Section 147, 302 read with Section 34 I.P.C. and each of the said accused was sentenced to suffer one year s rigorous imprisonment under Section 147 and imprisonment for life under Section 302. The accused Mohan was further convicted under Section 404 I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer two years rigorous imprisonment and also a fine of Rs. 500/-. In default of payment of fine, further rigorous imprisonment for six months. The learned Additional Sessions Judge directed that the sentences would run concurrently.

2. Against the said judgment, three separate appeals were preferred by the convicted accused before the High Court being D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 788 of 1974. D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 64 of 1975 and D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 819 of 1975. All the said appeals were disposed of by the common judgment since impugned in these appeals by dismissing the said appeals and maintaining the conviction and sentences passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.

3. On February 24,1974, P.W. 1 Surja Ram the brother of the deceased Ramu lodged F.I.R. with Police Station, Sardarsanar, to the effect that at about 10.00 A.M. on February 24, 1974 there was a numour in the village Mitasar that a dead body was lying in the Taxi located outside the village Mitasar. According to Surja Ram, P.W. 3, Musmat Mall had identified the dead body as that of her husband Ramu. When Surja Ram caused enquiry, she told that previous night at about 10 to 10.30 the accused Mohan and another person not known to her had come to her house. She had served tea to those persons and the said persons had told her husband that a truck of sugar was standing near the Taal and Ramu had taken money with him to purchase the sugar. Her husband Ramu went with the said persons after taking Rs. 200/ - with him. Thereafter, Ramu did not return to his house out was found to be dead in the Taal on February 24, 1974.

4. On the basis of the said F.I.R., a case under Section 302 was registered by the police and on February 28,1974, the police arrested the accused Balmukand, Mohan, Duli Chand, Yashin and Balbir Singh. It may be stated here that the accused Balmukand later on became the approver and deposed as PW. 12. According to the prosecution case, on March 3, 1974, at the instance of accused Yashin. Police had recovered a lathi stated to have been used in the crime and on the very same day at the instance of other accused. Police had recovered a day (Sharp. edged Weapon) alleged to have been used in committing the crime. On March 4, 1974, a test identification parade was held and Musamat Mali had identified the accused Balbir Singh. Balmukand intended to become approver in the case and his statement was recorded under Section 161 Criminal Procedure Code and on March 13,1974 the statement of Balmukand was recorded under Section 164 Criminal Procedure Code by the concerned Magistrate. Ultimately, on March 29,1974 Balmukand was declared as approver in the case.

5. All the said four accused faced the trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge under Sections 147, 302/34, 404 I.P.C. PW. 12 Balmukand, the approver, has deposed to the effect that in the month of January, 1974, about 20 to 25 days before 20th February, 1974, the said Balmukand, Mohan, Duli Chand, Yashin along with three other persons, namely, Pranav Ranjan, Kamal Bhomik and Raju Soni, had assembled in the Nehru Park at Sardarsanar for planning to commit dacoity. It was planned that initially petty dacoity would be committed and later on the