H.C. Mishra, J.

As both these appeals arise out of the same case, we have heard these appeals together and they are being disposed of by this common Judgment.

2. The appellants in both these appeals are aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction dated 16.3.1992 and order of sentence dated 23.3.1992 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Godda, whereby the appellant Ranjit Kumar Sah was found guilty for the offence under Sections 148, 302 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code and was convicted for the same, whereas the other appellants have been found guilty for the offence under Section 147 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and they were also convicted for the same. Upon hearing on the point of sentence, the appellant Ranjit Kumar Sah was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, he was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence under Section 324 of the IPC and R.I. for two years for the offence under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code. The other appellants were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 read with 149 of the Indian Penal code and rigorous imprisonment for two years for the offence under Section 147 of the IPC and all the sentences were directed to run concurrently. It may be stated that along with the appellants, one Janardhan Pal, had also been convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court below, but during the pendency of his criminal appeal No. 50 of 1992(P), he died and accordingly, by order dated 1.9.2016 passed by this Court, the appeal abated qua the said appellant.

3. The sole appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 86 of 1992 faced the trial for the offence under Sections 148, 302 and 324 of the Indian Penal code and Section 3 of the Explosive Substance Act, whereas the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.50 of 1992 faced the trial for the offence under Sections 147 and 302 of the Indian Penal code read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. The prosecution case giving rise to these appeals is that on 30.5.1989 at about 7:00 PM in the evening, there was some noise of altercation, whereupon the informant Dilip Prasad Sah went to the place of occurrence and saw that Manas Kumar Dutta and Asit Kumar Dutta were surrounded by the accused persons Ranjit Sah, Birendra Sah, Sharat Chandra Dutta, Janardhan Pal (since dead), Nand Kumar Bhagat, Uttam Kumar Dutta and Bipin Kumar Jaiswal and the father of the informant was trying to pacify them, asking them not to quarrel. The informant also requested the accused persons not to quarrel among themselves and stated that he was taking his father to his home, whereupon all the aforesaid accused persons shouted to kill all of them and the accused Ranjit Sah assaulted the father of the informant by bomb causing injuries on his chest, due to which his father fell down and died at the spot. The informant Dilip Prasad Sah, Manas Kumar Dutta and Asit Kumar Dutta also sustained injuries by the splinters of the bomb. Thereafter, the accused persons fled away and entered into the house of one Ganesh, closed the front door and fled away through the rear door. The fredbeyan to the aforesaid effect was recorded at about 11 PM in the same night, on the basis of which Boarijore (Lamatia) P.S. Case No. 49 of 1989, corresponding to G.R. No. 417 of 1989, was instituted and investigation was taken up. After investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet also against three more accused persons, namely Anandi Dutta, Birbal Sah and Sheo Kumar Dey, besides the aforementioned accused persons. After commitment of the case to the Court of Session, the charges were framed as aforesaid against the accused persons. There being denial of the charges by the accused persons, they were put to trial.

5. In course of trial, 14 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution, including the informant, the injureds, doctors