JUDGMENT :

Rajasekhar Mantha, J.:

1. The subject appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated April 26, 2018 and April 27 2018 respectively, passed by the Sessions Judge, Birbhum at Suri, in Sessions Trial No. 04(01) 2015 arising out of the Session Case No. 148 of 2014.

2. The appellants were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302/34 of the IPC. They were further directed to pay fine of Rs 1,00,000 (one lakh) each. In default thereof, they were to undergo a rigorous imprisonment for a period of 6 months.

3. The appellants were also sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 1 year for the offence committed under Section 448 of the IPC. They were also directed to pay a fine of Rs 5000 (five thousand) each. In default thereof, they were to undergo imprisonment for a period of 1 month each.

4. The appellants were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years for the offence committed under section 27 of the Arms Act. They were directed to pay a fine of Rs 50,000(fifty thousand) each. In default thereof, they were directed to suffer rigorous improvement for a period of 6 months.

5. The sentences were directed run concurrently. The Trial Court directed that if the aforesaid fine amount is realized from the appellants, the wife of the deceased Saraswati Ghosh shall be paid the said fine amount as compensation under section 357(1)/(b) of CRPC. The detention period already undergone by the appellants were directed to be set off against the aforesaid period of imprisonment

THE PROSECUTION CASE AND EVIDENCE ON RECORD

6. The victim, one Sagar Ghosh, received bullet injuries at his house on the night of July 22, 2013. At that time, he was with his wife, PW 14, Sarawati Ghosh and daughter-in-law, PW 15, Shibani Ghosh. The polling day for the said Panchayat election was scheduled on next day, 23 July 2013. Thus, a substantial police force and central force were deployed in the area. A number of police personnel serving in various state and central forces thus came to the house of the victim upon being intimated by the local Police station Panrui PS. The son of the victim Hriday Ghosh PW-19 was contesting as an independent candidate after being denied a ticket from the ruling political party of which he was a member.

7. The members of the ruling party based in the village of Bandhnabagram Panchayat were not comfortable and happy with PW 19 contesting as an independent candidate in the said Panchayat election. The appellants were the members of the said ruling party. They were canvassing for the candidate nominated by the said ruling party. PW 19 has deposed that he used to reside in the house of his sister away from home out of fear against the appellants and the ruling dispensation.

8. PW 14 and 15 have deposed that PW 14 and 15 and the victim retired to their rooms that night when some people knocked on the main door of the house, claiming to be the police. The house had one main door on the southern side followed by an open courtyard. After the courtyard followed the dining area and kitchen which were covered and locked by an iron grill.

9. The investigating agency has failed to discover and rather has been rather utterly casual in ascertaining the design of the said grill gate. It has vacillated from its stand that the grill gate was covered with gunny bags to plastic.

10. However, any grill gate is designed with openings of sufficient width. This enables a person to insert their hand and fire bullets at the inmates of the house. This is evident from the bullets having been fired at the victim through the said grill gate. Both sides of the grill gate were open and visible from either side.

THE FIRING OF WEAPONS AND RECOVERY OF BULLET HEAD AND CARTRIDGES

11. PW 14 and 15 have deposed that the said main door of the victim's house was closed. On hearing the said knock at the door, the victim and PW 14 and 15 came to the grill covered and locked, dining area of the house. The