Sudhir Singh, J. – Heard Mr. Amish Kumar, learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant No. 1 and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. This criminal appeal has already been abated against the appellant Nos. 2 and 3, as both of them died during pendency of this appeal.

3. The present criminal appeal has been preferred in the year 1996, i.e. around 27 years, against the judgment of conviction and the order of sentence dated 17.11.1995 passed by Sri R.P. Chaudhary, 1st Addl. Sessions Judge, Khagaria in Sessions Case No. 127 of 1994, arising out of Gogri P.S. case No. 251/93 whereby and whereunder the appellant No. 1 has been convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “ the I.P.C.”) and Section 27 of the Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Section 302 of I.P.C. No separate sentence has been awarded under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

4. The prosecution case as per the fardbeyan of informant Nand Lal Paswan recorded by S.I. S.D.Singh of Mahesh Khunt (Gogari) Police Station at 1.00 a.m. in the office of Singh Transport is that the informant has his house in village Meheshkhunt which is adjacent north to the Assam Road. In the adjacent east of his house, the informant has a field in which he had grown potato during the relevant time and adjacent east to that potato field, there is house of Doman Paswan. The informant further stated that 5 days prior to the alleged date of occurrence, one Bimla Devi, daughter of Doman Paswan and wife of Chalitra Paswan had thrown excreta of her son in the potato field of the informant which was objected by the informant on which accused Saheb Kr. Paswan, son of Bimla Devi came over there and caught hold of his hair and assaulted him. On hulla, the members of the family of the informant and the neighbouring people came over there and pacified them. On the next day, a Panchayati was convened in which Sarpanch Satya Narayan Paswan and Naga Paswan etc., participated and they asked both the parties to maintain peace but accused Saheb Kr. Paswan, Chalitra Paswan and Doman Paswan disobeyed the direction of the Panch and came to the shop of the informant in the night of 16th and 17th of December, 1993 at 10.30 p.m. and shot fire at his father namely Bharat Paswan due to which he died. The informant’s father was sleeping at the shop along with informant and his younger brother Sanjay Paswan who awoke on hearing the sound of firing and in the light of lamp, saw that the bullet hit on the frontal part of head of informant’s father and blood started oozing. The informant further stated that the accused Saheb Paswan having country made pistol in his hand was standing near the head of Bharat Paswan and accused Chalitra Paswan and Doman Paswan were also standing there. After the firing, the informant’s father could not say anything and all three accused fled away. The accused persons also threatened the informant and his brother that if they would reveal the matter to any one, they would be killed. Once the accused persons left the place, the informant informed the nearby people about the incident and thereafter went to home and informed the family members viz. Umesh Paswan, Bhola Paswan, Yogendra Paswan etc., who came to the place of occurrence and saw the dead body of Bharat Paswan.

5. On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant, Gogari P.S. case No. 251/1993 was registered under Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act and investigation was taken up. On completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was submitted and accordingly cognizance was taken. Charges were framed under Sections 302/34 of the I.P.C. and Section 27 of the Arms Act against appellant No. 1 to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

6. During the trial, the prosecution examined altogether ten witnesses, namely, PW1 Bhola Paswan, PW2 Dhaneshwar Paswan, PW3 Umesh Prasad Singh, PW4 Sanjay Kumar Paswan, PW5 Nand Lal Paswan (informant), PW6 Yogen