Honble Mrs. Poonam Srivastav, J.—All the five appellants have been convicted in Session Trial No. 220 of 1980, State v. Mahendra Singh and four others vide judgment and order dated 12.2.1982 passed by the VIIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Azamgarh. The appellant Jainath Singh is now dead and his appeal stands abated vide order dated 25.11.2009. All the appellants Om Prakash, Mahendra Singh, Rajendra Singh, Sheo Nath and Jainath are convicted under Sections 307/149, I.P.C. and sentenced to five years R.I. Appellants Mahendra Singh, Om Prakash and Rajendra Singh have been convicted under Section 147 and sentenced to one year R.I. The appellant Jainath Singh (now deceased) and Sheonath Singh have also been convicted under Section 148, I.P.C. and sentenced to one year R.I. All the sentences are directed to run concurrently.

2. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place on 24.6.1977 at 8.00 A.M. in village Daulasepur, Police Station Mau, District Azamgarh F.I.R. was lodged on the same day at 9.40 A.M. by PW-1 Rampati Yadav.

3. The prosecution case in brief is that one Jai Singh, maternal uncle of accused Jainath was the owner of plot No. 192 situated in village Daulasepur. About one and half months prior to the occurrence in question, Jai Singh had transferred the said land to complaint Rampati. Before exeution of the sale deed accused Jainath Singh, maternal uncle of Jai Singh used to cultivate the said plot No. 192 on Batai. Accused Jainath Singh wanted to usurp the said plot but Jai Singh did not want to transfer it and accused Jainath Singh stopped supply of produce from his land given on Batai. There upon Jai Singh executed a sale deed in favour of complainant Rampati. Accused Jainath Singh became annoyed with the complainant and thereby said that he would not allow the complainant Rampati to plough and cultivate the said plot and also a case of mutation was pending before the Revenue Authorities and another civil Courts for cancellation of sale deed between the parties.

4. On 24.6.1977 at about 8.00 A.M. accused Jainath Singh, illegally encroached upon the said land and started to plough. When this came into notice of Rampati complainant, he went there and asked accused Jainath Singh to refrain himself from doing such illegal acts and thereupon the accused Mahendra Singh armed with lathi, Om Prakash armed with knife, Rajendra Singh being armed with a gun and Sheonath, arrived and on exhortation of accused Jainath Singh, his companions with an intention to kill Rampati assaulted. Accused Jainath Singh, Mahendra Singh, Om Prakash belaboured Rampati and caused injuries with lathis and knives. On receiving injuries Rampati fell down on the ground and accused Mahendra Singh and Om Prakash Singh inflicted knife injuries on complainant Rampati and that on raising alarm the villagers Jatiram, Ramdhani, Jamuna, Harashu and several others had arrived on the spot, in the meantime accused Rajendra Singh fired two shots with his gun which missed its target and after seeing large number of villagers, the assailants managed to escape.

5. Investigation of the case was entrusted to A.S.I. Ramjanam Giri, who recorded statement of the witnesses and thereafter arrived at the place of occurrence. On pointing out of the witnesses, site plan Ex. Ka-5 was prepared. He also went in search of the accused persons but they were not found at their houses. Thereafter he received the injury report and after completing the investigation, charge sheet Ex. Ka-6 was submitted against the accused persons.

6. The accused have denied that they did commit any such offence. They have attributed their false implication in the case on account of enmity and litigation. They have conceded that the complainant Rampati is the owner of plot No. 192 but they used to plough plot No. 191 and 192 both before the occurrence and on the date of occurrence they were ploughing the same and witnesses have deposed against them on account of cross case pending against them