JUDGMENT :

1. Both these criminal appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment. As such, both these criminal appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment.

2. Appellants-Ganesh @ Mangal Soren and Lal Murmu in Cr. Appeal (DB) No. 892/2008 and Appellants-Mangal Moris Murmu and Bablu Murmu have preferred these appeals against the judgment of conviction dated 30.06.2008, and order of sentence dated 02.07.2008, passed by Shri Vishwanath Sahu, Additional Sessions Judge-I, Rajmahal in S.C. Case No. 253 of 1998 arising out of Rajmahal P.S. Case No. 119/1990 corresponding to G.R. No. 195/1990, holding the appellants guilty of the offences under sections 302/34, 364/34 and 201/34 I.P.C and thereby sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence under section 302/34 I.P.C, R.I for ten years along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence under section 364/34 I.P.C and R.I for seven years along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for the offence under section 201/34 I.P.C. In default of payment of fine, they were further directed to undergo R.I for six months for each fine. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The period already undergone by the appellants during the trial was ordered to be set off.

3. Prosecution case was instituted on the basis of the fardbeyan of the Informant Matal Murmu, alleging therein that on 26.05.1990 at about 8.00 am, he had gone to Tinpahar for marketing, where some people told him that dead body of his brother Barka Murmu was lying on the railway track near village Salbandra. He rushed to the house of his brother and found that nobody was present there. His sister-in-law was also missing. Blood was splattered in the house. He went to the railway line between Parariya and Domtoli and found that dead body of his brother Barka Murmu was lying near the railway track. His dead body was severed into two pieces after being run over by a train. He also found sharp cutting injuries near his neck. He raised suspicion upon the present appellants as they were alleging that Barka Murmu had committed murder of Marang Murmu. He has further stated that the appellants have falsely implicated him and his brother Barka Murmu for the death of Marang Murmu. They had also demolished their house, due to which, he and his brother had left the village Salbandra and started living in their sasural at Sagarbanga.

4. After investigation, police submitted charge sheet in this case under sections 302, 364 and 201/120B I.P.C.

5. After cognizance, this case was committed to the court of sessions by Shri B. Sharan, Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Rajmahal as it was exclusively triable by the court of sessions.

6. Charge was framed against the appellants on 24.03.2000, under section 302/34, 364/34 and 201/34 I.P.C. Contents of the charge was read over and explained to the appellants in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

7. In order to prove its case, prosecution has adduced both oral and documentary evidence.

8. Matal Murmu (P.W-1) is the Informant of this case. He has supported the allegation as made out in his fardbeyan.

Cheti Hansda (P.W-2) is the wife of the Informant Matal Murmu. She has claimed herself to be the eyewitness to the occurrence.

Dr. Raman Kumar (P.W-3) has performed postmortem on the dead body of the deceased. He has proved the postmortem report which is Ext.-1.

Sohagni Murmu (P.W-4) is the daughter of the Informant Matal Murmu. She has also claimed to be the eyewitness to the occurrence.

Noman Ali (P.W-5) is the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Clas