JUDGMENT :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

1. Palkot P.S case No.33 of 2011 was registered on 03.07.2011 against Ghuran Sahu, Vimal Sahu, Kariya Sahu, Sudheshwar Sahu, Bhim Sahu, Rajendra Sahu, Mutu Sahu and Budheshwar Sahu under sections 147/148/149 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC) and section 27 of the Arms Act. After the death of Jehlu Sahu section 302 IPC was added in the report on 29.08.2011. In her fardbeyan which was recorded at 10:15 PM on 02.07.2011 at village-Nawadih, Sumati Sahu, wife of Jehlu Sahu, has stated that in the evening of 02.07.2011 her husband was at home. At about 08:30 PM, when she was talking to her husband her co-villagers, namely, Ghuran Sahu, Vimal Sahu, Kariya Sahu, Sudheswar Sahu, Bhim Sahu, Rajendra Sahu, Budheswar Sahu and Mutu Sahu came there, Ghuran Sahu entered the houses and, shot at the neck of her husband from point blank range. On sustaining firearm injury her husband fell on the ground and became unconscious and the accused persons fled away firing shots in the air; She has claimed that she could identify the accused persons, in the electric light and stated that the reason for the Occurrence was an old land dispute. She has further stated that the other accused persons were carrying lathi-danda.

2. After the investigation a charge-sheet was laid against Ghuran Sahu, Vimal Sahu, Kariya Sahu, Sudheswar Sahu, Bhim Sahu, Rajendra Sahu, Budheswar Sahu and Mutu Sahu and the appellants have faced the trial in the charge under sections 302/149, 147/149 and 148/149 IPC and section 27 of the Arms Act - Bhim Sahu was found juvenile and therefore his trial was separated whereas the trial against Sudheswar Sahu was split up due to his abscondence. During the trial the prosecution has examined 12 witnesses out of whom PWI-Dwarika Sahu, PW2-Sumati Sahu and PW3-Krishna Sahu are close relatives of Jehlu Sahu, the deceased. The other prosecution witnesses who are the co-villagers said to be distantly related to the deceased. The accused persons have examined 3 witnesses to set-up a defence that they were falsely implicated in this case, due to past enmity. The another defence taken by the accused persons is that the deceased, namely, Jehlu Sahu was done to death by Mangal Nagesia or the extremists at the instance of Lalu Kharia with whom he had a bitter fight about one year ago.

3. Dr. Mira Shashmal who has conducted the post-mortem examination has found multiple antemortem crust abrasions of varying sizes ranging from pin-head to 4-5mm in diameter, spread from lower part of deltoid to upper part of thyroid cartridge. She has made the following observations about the injuries on the person of Jehlu Sahu:

"(1) The eyes of deceased were closed and conjunctiva pale, Cornea was hazy, mouth was Closed with the tongue inside the teeth. Rigor mortis strong in the neck and all limbs. The decomposition absent. P.M Livibity fixed on the back. History of body being kept in the cool environment of morgue house.

(2) There was multiple antemortem crust from abrasions of sizes varying from pin head to 4 to 5 millimeter diameter distributed over an area of lower part of deltoid 10" in length up to upper part of thyroid cartilages 6" wide. The space between the crust shows patchy bum wounds. The crust appeared as a forceful hot materials spread from lateral to medial direction.

(3) There was an antemortem stitch wound of length 6" x 3/4" wide x 1/2" depth at the posterior boarder of right eastern-mastoid muscle on the neck and gradually becomes dipper towards interior middle part of the neck which is 1-1/2" deep. This is a lacerated wound.

(4) The mandible adjacent to this wound is broken and lacerated. The flour of the lacerated wound showed destroyed muscle and vessels and other soft tissues. The margin of and flour of the wound is infected with presence of pus. The age of this injury is 3 to 5 days prior to death of the deceased.

4. The. learned District and Additional Sessions Judge-I, Gumla has held that the witne