Pritinker Diwaker, J.

1. As these criminal appeals arise out of the common judgment dated 30.4.2011 passed by the 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, District Sarguja in Sessions Trial No. 283/2008, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. Appellants have been convicted under Sections 302/34 & 397of the Indian Penal Code (for short "the IPC") and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life & fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo additional R.I. for two months and R.I. for 07 years & fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to undergo R.I. for two months respectively.

2. As per the prosecution case, both the accused/appellants were working as Constable in the armed force of the State. It is alleged that accused/appellant Goverdhan Yadav wanted to marry Vinayaka Yadav (PW-4), wife of deceased Vinod Yadav, and he had threatened her that in case she marries to someone else, he would first kill the said person and would take away said Vinayaka (PW-4). It is further alleged that on the date of incident, when the deceased was going on his motorcycle, the accused/appellants stopped him near Daldhowa Ghat i.e. on the main road, and thereafter accused/appellant Goverdhan Yadav caused gunshot injury to the deceased as a result of which he died. The deceased was immediately taken to the hospital with the help of Dr. Hari Shankar Mishra (PW-2) but he was declared brought dead in the hospital. Upon receiving information from Peon of hospital, Merg Intimation (Ex. P-2) was recorded at 12.05 noon and on the basis of merg enquiry, offence under Sections 302 & 394 of the IPC and Sections 25 & 27 of the Arms Act was registered against unknown persons. Postmortem on the dead body of deceased was conducted on 24.3.2008 by Dr. N.K. Dutt (PW-11) and as per postmortem report (Ex. P-5), cause of death was shock due to gunshot injury.

3. During the course of investigation, statement of Smt. Vinayaka Yadav (PW-4) was recorded in which she had disclosed that she was threatened by the accused/appellants. After recording of case diary statements of the witnesses, ultimately charge sheet was filed against the accused/appellants on 30.9.2008. While framing charge, the trial Judge has framed charges against the accused/appellants under Section 302, in alternative Section 302/34 and Section 397 of the IPC read with Sections 25 &27 of the Arms Act.

4. So as to hold the accused/appellants guilty, the prosecution has examined 22 witnesses. Statements of the accused/appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. in which they denied the circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution case and pleaded innocence & false implication.

5. The trial Court after hearing counsel for the respective parties and considering the material available on record, by the impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the accused/appellants as mentioned in Para-2 of this judgment.

6. Learned counsel for the appellant submits as under:

"(i) that there is no direct or indirect evidence against the accused/appellants on which basis their involvement can be proved for the alleged murder of deceased Vinod Yadav.

(ii) that nothing has been seized from the possession of the accused/appellants on which basis it can be said that they were involved in any manner in the offence.

(iii) mere fact that accused/appellant Goverdhan Yadav had threatened Smt. Vinayka Yadav (PW-4) and the deceased for dire consequences is not sufficient to involve the accused/appellants in commission of offence.

(iv) that, even if the statements of Shyamlal (PW-5), Francis Khalko (PW-17), Smt. Sushila Devi (PW-21) & Nand Kishore Yadav (PW-22) are taken as it is, it cannot be said that involvement of accused/appellants has been proved by the prosecution.

(v) that, diary statement of Francis Khalko (PW-17) was recorded after about six months of incident therefore the same is required to be completely ignored.

(vi) that, in case of unknown miscreants test identification parade was required in order to establ