Judgment

VARADARAJAN, J.:- These appeals by special leave are against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 2371 of 1970, dismissing the appeal and confirming the conviction of all the appellants under S. 302 read with S. 149 I.P.C., of appellants Rameshwar, Rajju and Banthu under S. 148 I.P.C. and of appellants Kallu Singh, Lallu Singh and Lalji Singh under S. 147 I.P.C. and the sentences awarded to them by the trial court, namely, imprisonment for life under S. 302 read with S. 149 I.P.C., rigorous imprisonment for two years under S. 148 I.P.C. and rigorous imprisonment for one year under S. 147 I.P.C.

2. The prosecution case was that on 3-9-1967 -one Satti Din was keeping a watch over his sal and other crops in his naultar field while his brother Ramashankar (P.W.1) was grazing his bullocks in a nearby field. Satti Din began to drive to the pound some cattle of the appellant, Rameshwar which had strayed into his field. Then the appellant Rameshwar came there, armed with a pharsa and asked Satti Din to release the cattle. On Satti Din refusing to release the cattle, appellant, Rameshwar cried out whereupon the other appellants, Rajju, Banthu, Lalji, Kallu and Lallu came to the field. Then Rajju and Banthu were armed with a barchhi and an axe respectively while Lalji, Kallu and Lallu were armed with lathis. On seeing those appellants, Satti Din began to run towards-the north. The appellants followed Satti Din and attacked him with their weapons, appellant Rameshwar opening the attack with his pharsa, and all of them beat him even after he had fallen down. On Satti Din raising alarm, Ramashankar (P.W. 1), Bachha Singh (P.W.2), Malkhan Singh (P.W.3) and Nanku went there and witnessed the occurrence and on their running towards the scene all the appellants ran away. Satti Din was found dead, and Ramashankar (P.W. 1) went to the police station along with two-others after leaving the dead body of his brother in charge of Chowkidar Kayali. On the way Ramashankar (P.W. 1) and others had to cross a jungle where they saw the appellants waiting and so they got afraid and returned to their village. However, P.W.1 went next morning along with one Subedar to the police station where his oral complaint was recorded by a Head-Constable at 9 a.m. The Station House Officer, Korara Police Station, P.W. 6 took up investigation and went to the village and found the appellants absconding,

3. Dr. Gupta conducted autopsy on the body of Satti Din at 12 noon on the next day 5-9-1967 and found 8 incised wounds, 5 punctured wounds, and 4 contusions and the cartilage of the right ear out through and through and he opined that the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The injuries were on vital parts of the body like the head, chest and abdomen. The right lung had been punctured and the mandible had been cut.

4. The appellants pleaded not guilty. Rameshwar stated that Ramashankar (P.W. 1) has falsely implicated him on account of enmity because he had got him prosecuted for the murder of his father. The appellants stated that they have been falsely implicated on account of enmity. The suggestion of the appellants made to the prosecution witnesses was that Bachha Singh (P.W.2) and Malkhan Singh (P.W.3) killed Satti Din and had falsely implicated them in this case. They examined Ram Swarup (D.W.1) and Gajraj Singh (D.W.2) in support of their defence.

5. The prosecution examined Ramashankar (P.W.1) Bachha Singh (P.W.2) and Malkhan Singh (P.W.3) as eye-witnesses. The trial court accepted the evidence of these three witnesses and convicted the appellants as stated above. Before the High Court, the main argument was that the case against the appellants, Lalji. Kallu and Lallu was not free from doubt. P.Ws. 1 to 3 have deposed about the place and time of occurrence, as deceaseds Narsara Har and 5 p.m. on 3-9-1967 whereas the suggestion of the appellants was that Satti Din was attacked at Bhauli Har which i