Pritinker Diwaker, J.

This appeal arises out of judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 14.01.2002 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge. Raipur In Session Case No.426/2001, convicting the appellants under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.3000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo RI for one year, and to undergo RI for three years and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months, respectively, with a direction to run the sentences concurrently.

2. In the present case, name of the deceased is Atmaram. As per the prosecution case, on 10.09.2001 at about 2.00 a.m. missing report (Ex.-P/1 C) was lodged by Chowaram Dewangan (PW-3), cousin brother of the deceased, alleging therein that Atmaram is missing since 06.30 p.m. This missing report was entered into rojnamcha sanha. On 11.09.2001, memorandum (Ex.-P/3) of appellant No.1 Manharan was recorded at 09.30 a.m. wherein he has stated that on account of previous dispute regarding cutting of fallen tree he and co-accused Radhelal have', killed J-re deceased. Based on this memorandum dehati nalishi (EX:- P/15) was recorded against the appellants on 11.09.2001. Inquest (Ex.-P/5) on the dead body was prepared and the dead body was sent for postmortem which was conducted on 11.09.2001 vide Ex.-P/28 by Dr. Ajay Khandekar (PW-12) and the autopsy surgeon noticed following injuries on the body of the deceased:-

(1) Body - incised wound on the right thenar eminence above 7 cm x 2cm. Margin an B regular, presence of blood on both margins horizontal in direction,

(2) incised wound on the left hypothenar eminence of 2cm x 1cm

(3) Neck -incised wound present on right side of the neck in the middle portion. One incised wound present size 7cm x 3cm. x 2cm, margin regular direction horizontal main blood vessels are cut.

(4) Head - incised wound 4 in number in scalp

(5) multiple blunt injurt on the chest

(6) multiple abrasions on the right whole back & upper part of left back

(7) multiple abrasion on both lower legs on aneterior aspects

As per the postmortem report, death of the deceased was due to syncope because of haemorrhage on account of injury to head neck, chest, heart and the nature of death is homicidal. On 11.09.2001 First Information Report (Ex.-P/24) and merg intimation (Ex.-P/25) were also recorded.

Vide EX.-P/8 to P/14 following seizure were effected.

(1) one satka from appellant Radhelal, vide Ex- P/8.

(2) from the place of incident, one full pant and one slipper of the deceased, vide Ex-P/9.

(3) from the place of incident, one black colour Bi-cycle, one spray machine and one plastic container, vide Ex-P/10.

(4) from the place of incident, blood stained soil and plain soil, vide Ex-P/11.

(5) from appellant Manharan one axe, vide Ex-P/12.

(6) from appellant Manharan one white baniyan with blood stains and one tericot lungi with blood stain, vide EX.-P/13.

(7) from appellant Radhelal one shirt and one full pant, vide Ex-P/14

(8) blood stained clothes of the deceased, vide EX.-P/19

3. After completion of investigation, charge was sheet against the accused/appellants. The trial Judge framed the charges under Sections 302/34 and 201/34 IPC against them.

4. So as to hold the appellants guilty, the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses, Statement of the accused/appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., in which they denied the Circumstances appear-against them in the prosecution case, pleaded innocence and false implication in the case.

5. The trial Court after hearing counsel for respective parties and considering the material available on record, by the impugned judgment convicted and sentenced the accused/appellants as mentioned in para-1 of the judgment.

6. Counsel for the appellants, submits that:

1. the accused/appellants have been convicted solely on the basis of circumstantial evi