Ratnaker Bhengra, J.

All the aforesaid four analogous appeals, preferred against one and same judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 18.01.2003 passed by the 3rd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Dumka in Session Case no. 82/2000 as well as Sessions Case No. 593 of 2002 have been taken up together for convenience of the court. By the impugned judgment, all the five FIR named accused persons have been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life under Sections 302/34 of I.P.C for commission of murder of one Congress Rai.

2. Informant is the wife of the deceased, who has set law into motion by giving her fardbeyan before S.I of police S.K. Mitra, which was recorded on 01-10-1999 at 14.30 hours at place of occurrence ie near the house of accused Digambar. It is alleged that on 01.10.1999 at about 2.00 P.M. when the deceased, who used to work as mason, came back home from his work, his wife(informant) informed him that today i.e. on 01.10.1999, on the eve of Jitiya festival accused persons had caught fish from their joint pond and they distributed the same among themselves but did not give his share to her, on which informant and deceased went to the house of the accused Digambar Rai for demanding their share, upon which, the accused persons became furious and started assaulting the husband of informant having thrashed him on ground, whereupon informant raised alarm to save her husband and she was also assaulted. It is further alleged that one Rajendra Rai gave knife blow in the stomach of deceased as a result of which intestine came out from his stomach, meanwhile, Jitan Rai, Guggu Rai, Digamber Rai dealt sickles blows in the stomach of the deceased due to which deceased died instantaneously.

3. On the aforesaid allegations, formal F.I.R. bearing No 50/99 against the five accused persons under Sections 302, 114 and 34 of the I.P.C. came to be registered. Investigation of which was taken by S.I S.K. Mitra (not produced during trial) which on its completion resulted into filing of charge-sheet against all the five accused persons, who were put to trial and they stand convicted and sentenced as per impugned order.

4. As it appears from the statement of accused persons recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C that they have denied their allegation in this occurrence and pleaded their false implication. The further defence of accused persons is that santhal people murdered deceased due to previous enmity and threw his dead body at so called place of occurrence and taking its benefit, informant has falsely implicated the accused persons out of enmity.

5. Heard Mr. Sharma, the senior Advocate appearing for all the accused persons and Pankaj Kumar A.P.P for the state.

6. Mr. Sharma the learned counsel for appellant, assailing the impugned judgment submitted that the recording of fardbeyan is itself suspicious as the statement of first informant, the wife of deceased (P.W. -7) on oath has differed from her initial statement particularly when, in her deposition, she stated that she went to thana with her son and Gobardhan and got her fardbeyan registered whereas the fardbeyan is recorded at the place of occurrence itself therefore it appears that the present fardbeyan is not one which was given at the police station and subsequently a coloured version has been brought forward to implicate the accused persons. He submitted that second fardbeyan is therefore hit by section 162 Cr.P.C and can not be made the basis of prosecution case.

7. Learned Senior counsel also submitted that place of occurrence has not been proved as no site plan has been prepared in this case and argued that it is fatal for the prosecution case.

8. Learned senior counsel further submitted that informant happens to be the so called sole eye witness and interested one also, has given two versions of incident hence not reliable and believable to hold. He has finally submitted that all the five accused persons have been falsely implicated by taki