N.P.SINGH, J.

1. Both the appellants have been convicted u/S. 302 of the I.P.C. for committing murder of Sheo Pujan Bhagat and have been sentenced to imprisonment for life.

2. The Prosecution case, as set out in the first information report, Ext. 2, is that on 18-3-1975 the informant Janki Bhagat, P.W. 9 learnt that the appellants alon gwith other accused 15-20 unknown persons, armed with various weapons were harvesting Rahar Crop from his field, bearing plot No. 1331 of village Nautan. The informant, alon gwith Brij Bihari Prasad, P.W. 1 Rama Pandey, P.W. 3 Raghunath Rai P.W. 5, Parsuram Pandey P.W. 6 and some other villagers went there and protested whereupon appellant Satya Narain Bhagat, who was armed with a Bhala and Jai Prakash Bhagat with a Farsa, chased them, along with other accused through the field of Sheo Pujan Bhagat, since deceased. The deceased who was upfooting line seed plants from his field, situated adjacent north of the informants field, along with his brother Sheojee Bhagat, P.W. 2 protested and told them not to trample his crop upon which appellant Satya Narain Bhagat gave two Bhala blows to the deceased causing incised wound on the left side of his chest and on his left arm. The deceased fell down in the field, then appellant Jai Prakash Bhagat, gave him a farsa blow causing on incised wound on the right side of his face near the ear. On alarm, raised by the informant the appellants fled away, along with their associates and accused persons. Sheo Pujan Bhagat was brought near Seesam tree, situated near the place of occurrence and from there he was removed to Nautan Health Centre for treatment where he was declared dead. Mahal Chaukidar, Ran Mangal Chaudhary, P.W. 7 and Dafadar Quitubuddin were called and they brought the dead body of the deceased to Mairwa P. S. The informant Janki Bhagat, P.W. 9 lodged first information report, Ext. 2 at the police station which was recorded by the sub-Inspector, Damodar Prasad Singh. P.W. 12 at 7-15 p.m. and he took up investigation of the case.

3. After the charged-sheet and cognizance, the case was committed to the court of session for trial.

4. The accused in defence, denied the prosecution case as alleged in the FIR. Their further defence, was that this case was instituted by the informant Janki Bhagat, P.W. 9 as a counter blast to Mairwa P.S. case No. 9/75, which was earlier instituted by the appellant Jai Prakash Bhagat relating to the same occurrence, stating that they were in possession of plot No. 1881 as Bataidar under Bhahma Singh, a rightfull owner of the land. On the alleged date and time of occurrence, while his mother Sugiya Devi was cutting grass in the field, about 50 persons came there shouting slogan and started harvesting the crop from the field. When appellant Jai Prakash along with others went there and protested Raghunath Ram, P.W 5, Janki Bhagat P.W. 9 Brij Bihari Prasad P.W. 1, Ganesh Dhobi P.W. 4 and deceased Sheo Pujan Bhagat and others assaulted them with their respective weapons. On hulla prosecution party members fled away. He, his mother Sugia and appellant Satya Narain Bhagat were removed to the Hospital, where his fardbeyan Ext. 1 was recorded and FIR, Ext. H was drawn up. After chare-sheet and cognizance, the case was committed to the court of session for trial.

5. The defence, also examined five D. Ws. out of them D. W. 1, Dr. M. N. Singh had examined Sugia and the two appellants at Mairwa Hospital and had referred them to Siwan Hospital for treatment where they were treated by D.W. 3 Dr. S.B. Singh, D.W. 4 Brahma Singh claims to have purchased plot No.1331 and let out the same on Batai to the appellants. D.W. 2 and 5 are formal witnesses. They have proved some documents.

6. Out of 12 witnesses examined by the prosecution P.W. 10 Janardhan Prasad, P.W. 11 Amarnath Prasad are formal witnesses. They have proved sale deeds (Exts.3 and 3/1) which stands in the name of informant Janki Bhagat, in respect of plot No. 1331. P.W. 6 Par