IMPORTANT POINT
The prosecution must establish the place of occurrence, presence of witnesses, and identification of the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. Prompt lodging of the FIR and examination of the Investigating Officer are crucial for a fair trial.

JUDGMENT :

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. By the judgment of conviction dated 05.09.2018 and the order of sentence dated 07.09.2018/13.09.2018 passed by Sri Tribhuvan Nath, Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST and POCSO Act), Munger in Sessions Trial No. 12/2013 arising out of Kharagpur P.S. case No. 58/2010/C.S. No. 2441/2013 whereby and whereunder the appellant Shankar Pandit (Cr. Appeal No. (D.B.) No. 1355 of 2018) and the appellant Paltu Kumar Pandit @ Surendra Kumar Pandit @ Ramkumar Pandit (Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1338 of 2018) have been convicted for the offences under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to ‘I.P.C.’) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment till death and a fine of Rs. 50,000/-and in default of payment of fine, they have been directed to further undergo additional simple imprisonment for six months. It was further directed that the period of custody undergone by the appellants during the course of trial shall be set off under the provisions of Section 428 of the Cr.P.C. Further, by the judgment of conviction dated 05.09.2018 and the order of sentence dated 18.09.2018 passed by Sri Tribhuvan Nath, Additional Sessions Judge-1st-cum-Special Judge (SC/ST and POCSO Act), Munger, in Sessions Trial No. 12A/2013, arising out of Kharagpur P.S. case No. 58/2010/C.S. No. 2441/2013, the appellant Narayan Pandit (Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1337 of 2018), appellants Nago Pandit, Jogi Pandit, Bhuneshwar Pandit, Umesh Pandit and Bigan Pandit (appellants in Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1341 of 2018) and appellant Bibhishan Pandit (Cr. Appeal (D.B.) No. 1370 of 2018) have been convicted for the offences under Sections 302/149 of the I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment till death and a fine of Rs. 50,000/-and in default of payment of fine they have been directed to further undergo additional simple imprisonment for six months. It was further directed that the period of custody undergone by the appellants during the course of trial shall be set off under the provisions of Section 428 of the Cr.P.C.

3. The prosecution case, as per the written report of informant, namely, Ghanshyam Pandit is that on 01.03.2010 at about 8:30 p.m. after taking meal, the informant along with family members was going to sleep in the meantime his neighbour Pintu Kumar Pandit called informant’s father namely Kailash Pandit to open the door. Then he called informant’s younger uncle Ramnath Pandit to open the door for taking medicine. Informant’s mother Pancha Devi opened the door and as soon as the door was opened, the accused persons including the appellants along with 7-8 unknown persons in uniform having S.L.R., Rifle, Farsa and sword in their hands entered into informant’s house and tied both hands of informant’s father and took towards south after assaulting him. The family members of the informant along with others started crying and followed the accused persons. The accused persons took informant’s father in front of the house of Bichcho Shaw and on the orders of Narayan Pandit, Shankar Pandit beheaded the informant’s father and closed the family members of the informant in the house of Mukesh Yadav. The accused persons threatened that if any one would disclose the incident, then whole family will be killed. The informant saw the whole occurrence by hiding him inside the bamboo bushes. After killing the informant’s father, the accused persons went towards west raising slogan ‘Maowadi Zindabad’ and left the place of occurrence. The informant and family members, out of fear, hid themselves in the house. In the next morning, the informant also got information that accused persons had also killed the Chowkidar Kamleshwari Pandit by beheading him and two purchas were left at the place of occurrence in which it was written in red ink that the same punishment will be given to the spy of the police. On the basis of written report of the informant,