JUDGMENT :

1. Learned State counsel has submitted that appellants No. 2 and 3 have died. Thus, appeal qua appellants No. 2 and 3 abates and is disposed of accordingly qua them.

2. Appellant No. 1 Suresh has filed the appeal challenging his conviction and sentence ordered by the Trial Court under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as "IPC") vide judgment/order dated 13.01.1987.

3. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 06.03.1984 at about 11.00 a.m., complainant alongwith his father and sister Soma had gone to get water from the well. Father of the complainant was taking a bath near the well and complainant was taking out water from the well. In the meantime, appellant No. 1 Suresh who was armed with a Pharsa gave a blow with it on the neck of Ram Kishan. Jagannath gave a Pharsa blow from reverse side to Ram Kishan. As a result, Ram Kishan fell down. On hearing alarm raised by the complainant and his sister, Bhauti and Sarwati came to the spot and rescued the complainant and Soma. Bhauti was given a Pharsa blow by Prem Chand. Dinesh and Kajodi gave a stick blow to her. Prem Chand gave a Pharsa blow to Sarwati. Dinesh and Kajodi gave a stick blow to her. In the meantime, Babu, Doji, Ram Sahai and Lakhan came to rescue the complainant party.

4. After completion of investigation and necessary formalities, challan was presented against accused Suresh, Gunti, Bhagwanaya, Kajodi, Kanhaiya, Ghanshyam, Jagannath and Nemichand.

5. Charges were framed against the accused and they did not plead guilty to the charges framed against them by the Trial Court and claimed trial.

6. In order to prove its case during trial, prosecution examined 13 witnesses. After the close of prosecution evidence, accused when examined under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, prayed that they were innocent and had been falsely involved in this case. Appellant No. 1 Suresh further stated that he had gone to bring his paternal aunt and was not present at the spot.

7. Trial Court vide judgment/order dated 13.01.1987 ordered conviction and sentence of appellant No. 1 Suresh under Section 302 IPC. So far as accused Bhagwanaya and Jagannath are concerned, they were convicted qua offence punishable under Sections 323 and 324 IPC and were granted benefit of probation. The remaining accused were acquitted of the charges framed against them.

8. Learned counsel for appellant No. 1 Suresh has submitted that the said appellant was aged about 14-15 years at the time of incident. Appellant No. 1 Suresh was not present at the spot at the time of incident and has been falsely involved in the case. In this regard, learned counsel has placed reliance on statement of D.W. 2 Balram.

9. Learned State counsel has opposed the appeal.

10. Present case relates to murder of Ram Kishan.

11. As per postmortem examination report of the deceased Exhibit-P-1, which has been proved by P.W. 1 Doctor Brijendra Singh Rathore, deceased had suffered following injuries:-

"(1) A big incised would - obliquely directed 6" X 2" X bone deep - situated on lower part of the back and right side of the neck - cutting through all structures right upto vertebrae.

(2) A bruise 2" X 1" on the right shoulder.

(3) A bruise 2" X 1" on the right clavicular region."

12. As per P.W. 2 Maharaj Singh, P.W. 7 Soma and injured P.W. 6 Kanhaiya, appellant No. 1 Suresh had given a Pharsa blow on the neck of Ram Kishan. Thus, the ocular version is duly corroborated by medical evidence with regard to the role of appellant No. 1 Suresh in the crime. As per the postmortem examination report Exhibit-P-1, cause of death of Ram Kishan was due to profuse haemorrhage from the vessels of the neck, cut through by injury inflicted by heavy sharp edged weapon.

13. Since, appellant No. 1 Suresh had inflicted a Pharsa blow on the neck of the deceased, it is evident that the intention of the appellant was to commit the murder of Ram Kishan. The injury had been inflicted with such force that it had cut the vessels