S.P.KUKDAY,J.

1. Both the appellants are convicted by Additional Sessions Judge, Ambejogai; for having committed murder of Sanjay Ganpatappa Kore in furtherance of their common intention. The appellants have filed this appeal questioning legality and propriety of this order of Conviction and sentence, dated 28the December, 2004.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that, on 13th January 2004 at mid night, both the appellants brought deceased Sanjay in drunken condition to the house of his father in auto-rickshaw, Ganpatappa (P.W.2) has eight sons. All of them except Shivhar (P.W.8) who is a bachelor, are living separately at Jalalpur, Taluka Parali-vaijnath; District Beed. There are only four houses between the house of the deceased and his father. The deceased was living there with his wife Meena (P.W.7) and young daughter Shital. He was serving as a driver with Arun Munde and was doing money lending business. As the deceased Sanjay was living separately, his father Ganpatappa told the appellants that they should drop Sanjay at his house. The appellants were reluctant to search the house of the deceased at that hour of the night, therefore, Ganpatappa sent his son Shivhar with them. After appellants and the deceased entered the house, his wife Meena made enquiries with the strangers. Both of them disclosed their names and told her that they are friends of her husband. After waiting for some time, the appellants insisted that they should have meals together and took the deceased with them.

3. On 14th December, 2004 at 7.00 o’ clock in the morning Rickshaw driver Kisan Phad of Kanerwadi went to the house of Police Patil Pralhad Munde (P.W.1) and informed him that dead body of 25 year old man is lying in front of his house. After confirming the information, Police Patil lodged report (Ex.15) with Parali Rural Police Station. On the basis of this report offence punishable under section 302 of the Penal Code was registered against an unknown person. After registration of the offence, Investigating Officer prepared panchanama of the scene of occurrence (Ex.17). There were no blood stains or other articles at the spot. Inquest (Ex.21) was then held on the dead body and it was sent for post mortem to Rural Hospital Parali. Appellants were arrested on the same day. Clothes of the appellant no.1 and appellant no.2 were attached under seizure memo (Ex.19 and 20).

4. Medical Officer Anant Gitte (P.W.16) performed the autopsy at 4.30 p.m. The medical Officer prepared postmortem report (Ex.50) giving details of the external and internal examination and opined that the death is caused on account of neurogenic shock due to testicular injury.

5. As the deceased did not report for duty, his employer Anil Munde made enquiries at his house at 8.00 o’ clock the morning. Meena told him that her husband has not returned. Thereafter, Meena went to the house of her mother in law and informed her that the deceased had not returned since last night. Mother in law conveyed the information to her husband at about 10.00 o’ clock in the morning when he returned home after selling milk. Ganpatappa sent his sons Rajesh (P.W.10) and Suresh, both of whom are rickshaw drivers, for searching the deceased at about 2.00 p.m. The brothers went to Bus Stand and asked Balaji (Appellant no.2) about the deceased. Appellant no.2 told them that he himself, Appellant no.1 Vachista and the deceased had been to Madhuban Dhaba for meals but he had returned early and does not know where the deceased went after the dinner. At that time Sk. Nasir who was nearby, told the brothers of the deceased that one dead body was found lying on the road at his village Kanerwadi and the Police have sent the body to Parali for post mortem. On getting this information the brothers went to the Parali Rural Police Station. They identified photograph of the deceased shown to them by the police officer. Both of