JUDGMENT :

(Subhash Chand, J.) :

Heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned counsel for the State.

1. The instant criminal appeal is preferred on behalf of the appellants against impugned Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 20th September, 1993 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Dumka (S.P.) in Sessions Case No.295 of 1991, whereby, the appellants nos.1 and 2, namely, Pritam Baitha and Jugal Baitha @ Gopal Baitha had been convicted under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and the appellant no.3, namely, Situ Baitha had been convicted for the offences under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code and the appellants had been sentenced to undergo rigorous life imprisonment; while two of the co-accused had been acquitted of the charge framed against them.

2. The brief facts giving rise to this criminal appeal are that the informant-Jairam Baitha (the brother of the deceased-Pairu Baitha) made his fard beyan to the police on 03.11.1990 stating therein that on 02.11.1990 at 11:00 a.m. his brother Pairu Baitha was removing clay from the wall in the lane. The accused Pritam Baitha, Jugal Baitha, Situ Baitha, Bhagan Baitha and Sabitri Devi all with intent