B.N.P.Singh, J.

1. All these three appeals arise of the judgment and order dated 28/9/2000 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge VI, Aurangabad in S.T. No. 320 of 1999, and hence they have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgement.

2. Successive dacoities were committed in the house of Musafir Yadav (P.W. 3) and Tulsi Yadav (P.W. 8) in the intervening nights of 20th/21st November, 1998, in the early hours when miscreants, having scaled over the wall of the house, jumped in the courtyard, coerced the house inmates, secured keys of the boxes from them and removed their belongings which included wearing apparels, ornaments and cash. However, in the scuffle that followed between Birendera Yadav (P.W. 2) and the miscreants, the former with the assistance of the family members, namely, Kanti Devi, Kalawati Devi and Sushila Devi apprehended one of them who disclosed his name to be Jakir Ahmad and eventually disclosed complicty of Jitan Paswan, Mahendra Thakur, Munna Yadav, Kapil Bhagat and Rajaram Singh. The miscreants while retreating from the houses, also took recourse to firing and hence, no one dared to chase them. It was alleged that while associates of Jakir Ahmad, made abortive bid to rescue him, there was scuffle between the house immates and the miscreants, when Birendra Yadav and family members suffered injuries on their persons at the hands of the miscreants and with these narrations, fardbeyan of Musafir Yadav (P.W. 3) was recorded by Shri Sheo Kumar Singh, Sub Inspector of Police on strength of which, first information report was registered at (sic) (Aurangabad) Police Station. Investigation commenced and in the process of investigation, Police officer recorded statement of witnesses under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, got test identification parade arranged, of the suspects, and on conclusion of investigation, laid charge sheet before the Court only against the appellants, showing Jitan Paswan, Munna Yadav, and Rajaram Singh absconding, pursuant to which on being committed to the Court of Session, the appellants were put on trial. In the eventual trial, prosecution examined altogether eight witnesses, who were house inmates, some villagers and also Shri R.R. Tiwary, Judicial Magistrate (P.W. 7), who held test identification proceeding, and the trial court placing implicit reliance on the testimony of these witnesses and also regard being had to the identification of Mahendra Thakur and Kapil Bhagat, rendered verdict of guilt against the appellants under Section 395 IPC and sentenced them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years which has been impugned in this appeal by the appellants having preferred three separate and distinct appeals challenging their conviction and also sentence recorded by the trial court.

3. Now adverting to the evidences placed on record, which forms basic of recording conviction against the appellants, one may first delve on the evidence of Musafir Yadav (P.W. 3) who set police in motion. The said witness while reiterating his early version which he had rendered before the Police, would state about the miscreants having gained access in the inner apartment of the house while scaling over the wall of the house, when they asssaulted Birendra Yadav and female members the house inmates too did assault the miscreants who removed house belongings and also committed successive dacoities in the house of his brother Tulsi Yadav (P.W. 8). This witness, however, would not state about disclosure made by the miscreants who was apprehended by the house inmates.

4. Surendra Yadav (P.W. 1) was sleeping in khalihan in the night of incident and he rushed to his house on alarm raised by the house inmaates. He noticed the main door of his house open and inside the house, Birendra Yadav, Sushila Devi, and his wife had overpowered one of the miscreants for whom his companions had scuffle with them to rescue him. The miscreants removed the house belo