JUDGMENT

GUPTA, J.:—The seven appellants before us were among the sixteen accused who were tried in the court of the Second Additional Sessions Judge at Chapra variously charged under Sections 302/34. 302/149, 147, 148, 324, 326 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated November 21, 1966 acquitted all the accused giving them the benefit of doubt of the view that the prosecution had not "come with clean hands" and there were indications of gradual improvement in the prosecution case. On appeal preferred by the State of Bihar, the Patna High Court by its order dated February 2, 1971 affirmed the order of the Additional Sessions Judge as regards nine of the accused but set aside the acquittal in the case of these seven appellants. Each of the Seven appellants was convicted under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. All of them were further convicted under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code but no separate sentence was passed under that section. Appellant Rameshwar Singh was further convicted under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and appellants Birjhan Dhanuk, Goberdhan Bind, Satan Keori and Dwarika Singh were also convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code but no separate sentence was passed against them under these sections.

2. There is no dispute that on the morning of November 24, 1965 there was an occurrence in village Bamo in police station Beikunthpur in the District of Saran resulting in the death of the two persons named Baldeo Singh and Brahma Singh. It is also admitted that there was ill-feeling between the appellants and the deceased and their people, described in the judgment of the 833 Additional Sessions Judge as the prosecution party - which description we shall adopt for the sake of convenience, over plot No. 283 in the aforesaid village. There had been proceedings under Sections 144 and 145 of Criminal P. C. over this land as a result of which Baldeo had been declared to be in possession of 11 Kathas 11 dhurs of land on the eastern side of the plot out of 14 kathas 11 dhurs. The possession of appellant Dharamdeo was declared in respect of 3 Kathas forming the western portion of the plot. The feelings between the parties were further embittered when the appellant Dharamdeo who was a candidate for mukhiaship in the gram Panchayat election in 1962 was defeated as a result of the prosecution party helping the rival candidate. The situation became so grave that proceedings under Section 107 of Criminal P. C. had to be started against both the parties. This was followed by another proceeding under Section 144 of Criminal P. C. over the possession of plot 283 but ultimately the respective possessions of the parties as before were upheld. In this tense atmosphere of rivalry, the occurrence out of which the appeal arises took place.

3. The prosecution version of the incident is like this. On November 24, 1965 in the morning Baldeo Singh along with his son Hirdaya Singh, brother Brahma Singh and Brahma s son Bhagwat Singh went to harvest the paddy standing on plot 283. They started the harvesting when all of a sudden the sixteen accused persons variously armed appeared and began assaulting the prosecution party. Baldeo, Brahma, Hirdaya and Bhagwat fled towards the east but were overtaken when they reached field of one Sheo Lochan Nonia. There appellants Dharamdeo gave a bhala blow in the abdomen of Brahma and appellant Rajinder Singh struck him with a pharsa Baldeo and Brahma fell down when the other accused persons also assaulted them. Appellant Rameshwar dealt a pharsa blow to Bhagwat. Appellant Dwarika assaulted Hirdaya with pharsa. One Tapi Singh who sought to intervene was struck by Birjhan with a pharsa and appellants Gobardhan and Saten with bhalas. The accused persons before leaving the place removed the harvested paddy lying on the plot 283 and also cut away the paddy still standing on the land