Hon’ble Mrs. Vijay Lakshmi, J.—This appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 12.4.1991 passed by IV Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in S.T. No. 191 of 1987 (State v. Radhey and Nanak Chand) under Sections 460, 302/34, 323/34 IPC., P.S. Partapur, District Meerut whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the appellant Nanak Chand under Sections 460 and 302 of IPC and has punished him for 10 years R.I. under Section 460 IPC and for life imprisonment under Section 302 IPC. The learned Sessions Judge has also found guilty, the appellant Nanak Chand for the offence punishable under Section 323/34 IPC and has awarded him sentence of three months rigorous imprisonment. The appellant Radhey Sharan has also been found guilty under Section 460, 323/34 and Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and has been awarded sentence of 10 years rigorous imprisonment for his conviction under Section 460 IPC and life imprisonment for the conviction under Section 302/34 IPC, 3 months rigorous imprisonment has been awarded to him under Section 323/34 IPC. All the sentences of both the appellants were to run concurrently.

2. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order of conviction and sentence the appellants have preferred this appeal on the grounds that their conviction is against the weight of evidence on record, the order of conviction is bad in law as well as on facts, and the sentence passed is two severe. Therefore, it has been prayed that the appeal be allowed, the impugned judgement be set aside and the appellants be acquitted of the charges levelled against them.

We have heard Shri Kuldeep Kumar, learned counsel for the appellants and Shri Pradeep Pandey, learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State and have carefully perused the lower Court’s record.

3. A brief description of prosecution story is that a written report was lodged by one Ram Kishan, S/o Lakhi Ram at P.S. Partapur against accused Nanak Chand and two unknown persons to the effect that in the intervening night of 7/8-10.1986 at about 12:30 a.m. three persons including Nanak Chand entered into the house of Lakhi Ram and reached near the (Dubari) i.e. the place where informant’s father Lakhi Ram and mother Smt. Ramrati were sleeping and attacked on them. Lakhi Ram raised alarm. On hue and cry, the witnesses Jagdish Prasad, Lakhan, Bhagwan, Rambir Choudhary and other villagers reached there and saw the assailants running away from the spot. By the time the villagers and neighbours had reached inside the room, the miscreants had made their escape good. The mother of the informant died due to the injuries sustained by her. Among the assailants Nanak Chand was recognised in the light of torch. Though the other two were unknown but they too can be identified by the witnesses if brought before them.

4. On the basis of this written report, the case was registered at Crime No. 231 under Section 460 of IPC against the appellant Nanak Chand and two unknown persons. The name of Radhey came to light during the investigation, when he was identified by the witness Lakhi Ram, Rambir and Jagdish in jail during identification parade. The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of witnesses, prepared the site plan, collected evidence and on conclusion of the investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the appellants Nanak Chand and Radhey Sharan. The case being exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, was committed to the Court of Sessions where it nproceeded with framing of charges against both the accused persons who, pleaded not guilty and claimed for their trial.

5. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined four witnesses of fact and five formal witnesses before the trial Court. A brief description of the prosecution witnesses is as follows :

P.W.-1 is Ram Kishan, the informant of the case. He is the son of injured Lakhi Ram and deceased Smt. Ramrati. P.W.-2 is injured Lakhi Ram himself, who is the husband of the deceased Ramrati ; P.W.-3 Rambir,