JUDGMENT

BHAGWATI, J.:— Accused Nos. 2 and 3, who are appellants before us, were tried along with accused Nos. 1 and 4 to 6 for various offences under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 or Section 34 and S. 326 read with S. 149 or S. 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Sessions Judge, who tried the case, acquitted all the six accused, including accused Nos. 2 and 3. But on appeal by the State the High Court reversed the acquittal and convicted and sentenced them to various terms of imprisonment. So far as accused Nos. 2 and 3 were concerned, they were convicted under Sec. 148 and Section 302 and each of them was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years for the former offence and imprisonment for life for the latter. Since the acquittal of accused Nos. 2 and 3 was reversed and they were convicted and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life, they became entitled to appeal to this Court under Section 2 of the SC (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act. 1970 and they accordingly preferred the present appeal.

2. The principal charge against all the six accused was that they formed an unlawful assembly and in pursuance of its common object, accused Nos. 2 and 3 stabbed one Chinna Pullannu (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) and intentionally caused his death and accused No. 1 caused simple injuries to P. W. 1. The deceased was a brother of accused No. 1. There were three other brothers of theirs, namely, Pakirappa, Pedda Pullanna and Chinna Peddanna, PW 1 was the wife of the deceased: PW 2 was the wife of Chinna Peddanna and daughter of PW 5: PW 3 was the wife of Pakirappa whose son Nettikallu was married to the grand-daughter of PW 5: PW 4 was Pedda Pullanna the brother of the deceased and accused No. 1 and PW 5 was the daughter of the elder brother of the father of the deceased and accused No. 1. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 were the sons of accused Number 1 and accused Number 4 was the brother-in-law of accused No. 2. Accused No. 2 had no house of his own and, therefore, the deceased had permitted him to occupy his house about three years before the date of the incident. It appears that sometime thereafter accused No. 2 got a gift-deed of the house executed by the deceased in his favour. When PW 1 came to know about this, she persuaded the deceased to revoke the gift-deed which was executed in favour of accused No. 2 and to execute a new gift-deed in favour of her and her two daughters. This, according to the prosecution, strained the relations between accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 on the one hand and the deceased and his wife PW 1 on the other and led to friction between them on various occasions.

3. The prosecution case was that on 16th November, 1968 at about 9.30 a.m. all the six accused, including accused Nos. 2 and 3, encountered the deceased as he was going along the lane from his house to the main road which leads from Bellary to Gooty. This lane is about ten feet wide and on the western side of the lane are situate inter alia the houses of the deceased, accused No. 2 and one Chennayya. The house of accused No. 2 is to the South of the house of the deceased and further south is the house of Chennayya. On seeing the deceased, the first accused deliberately collided against him and accused Nos. 1 to 3 dragged him into the house of accused No. 2 which was situate in the lane. Accused Nos. 4 to 6 followed them to the house of accused No. 2 and kept a vigil outside while 1543 accused Nos. 1 and 2 forcibly pushed the deceased into the house and started beating him in the cattle manger which occupied a part of the house. PW 1 went to the rescue of her husband, but she was hit by the first accused on the forehead with a brass chembu and when she raised her hands to ward off the blows, her bangles were broken and she sustained bleeding injuries on her head. Meanwhile the deceased managed to escape from the clutches of accused Nos. 1 to 3 and ran out of the house, but accused Nos. 4 to 6. who were