JUDGMENT :

V. Ramaswami, J.

1. These appeals are brought from the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated January 19, 1967 in Criminal Appeals Nos. 1197, 1198 t and 1229 of 1966. By this judgment the High Court affirmed the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Lucknow-Kanpur dated May 26, 1966 in Sessions Trial No. 6 of 1966 sentencing the appellants to death under Section 302, Indian Penal Code read with Section 149, Indian Penal Code and to two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 148, Indian Penal Code.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on September 1, 1965 at about 6 p.m. Nanney Singh and Dularey were sitting on a cot on the foot-path of the road under a tree near the flour mill owned by Nanney Singh in the Labour Colony, Nawabganj, in the city of Kanpur and Rakesh arrived and sat on the cot and began to talk to Nanney Singh. Shortly afterwards the present appellants arrived armed with pistols and knives. Ravindra alias Lalla, Mewa Lal and Surendra Singh were carrying pistols while Su-resh Chandra was armed with a knife. Rakesh also had a knife with him. On arrival the appellants shouted that Nanney Singh should be killed. Nanney Singh tried to run away but Rakesh caught hold of him and Suresh Chandra assaulted him with a knife and Mewa Lal fired a shot from his pistol in the air. Rakesh also struck Nanney Singh with his knife. Dularey tried to save Nanney Singh but Ravindra alias Lalla fired a shot at Dularey which hit him on the right eye. Dularey fell down and died on the spot. Nanney Singh also fell down unconscious. Mewa Lal fired a shot at Nanney Singh. Surendra Singh fired a shot in the air and all the appellants left the spot. Dadu Singh, P. W. 5 lodged the First Information Report at 6.45 p.m. on the same date. The Sub-Inspector, P.W. 10 immediately left for the spot and held an inquest on the dead bodies of Dularey and Nanney Singh. The inquest reports are Exs. Ka-9 and Ka-10. The Sub-Inspector thereafter took other steps in connection with the investigation of the crime. The postmortem examination of the dead bodies of Dularey and Nanney Singh was conducted by Dr. A. S. Gupta, P.W. 2. As many as 28 incised or punctured wounds were found on the dead body of Nanney Singh. The doctor also found three- gun-shot wounds of entrance, each x i". The first gun-shot wound was on the right side and front of the chest. 2k" medial to the right nipple, the second 3" below the above injury and the third on the right side and upper part of the abdomen. The first two injuries had entered the chest cavity and the third had entered the abdomen. On the dead-body of Dularey two incised wounds and a gun shot wound of entrance on the right eye were found. The whole of the right eye ball had been lacerated and as a result of the grazing of the gun shots two abrasions were also found near the B right eye. The death of Dularey was the result of this gun-shot injury. The appellants pleaded not guilty and alleged that they had been falsely implicated on account of enmity. Both the trial court and the High Court, however, accepted the prosecution case as true and held that the charges under Sections 148 and 302, Indian Penal Code were established against all the appellants. The B High Court also accepted the reference made by the Sessions Judge with regard to the sentence of death inflicted upon I the three appellants.

3. In Criminal Appeals 199 and 200 1 of 1967 Mr. K.K. Luthra contended that the two inquest reports contain suspicious alterations and the time of the First Information Report has been wrongly noted in the Inquest Reports. It was suggested that the First Information Report was recorded by the Sub- Inspector after the inquest was made but the time of recording the First Information Report has been falsely noted as 6.45 p.m. The matter has been considered by the High Court which took the view that the alterations were made bona fide and by mistake the time of the report was noted as 6.30 p.m. in the in quest report even th