Alok Kumar Mukherjee, J.

1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment and order dated 08.02.1983 passed by the learned Special Sessions Judge, Budaun in Sessions Trial No. 72 of 1982 (State Vs. Mohan and others) convicting the accused-appellants Mohan, Shiam Lal, Sita Ram and Har Bilas under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing each of them for life imprisonment.

2. It is relevant to mention here that while hearing of this appeal, it has been noticed by us that during the pendency of this appeal, the appellant no. 1 Mohan and appellant no. 2 Shiam Lal have died, therefore, the appeal filed on their behalf stands abated by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 04.04.2014. As such the appeal on behalf of the remaining surviving appellant no. 3 Sita Ram and appellant no. 4 Har Bilas, who are presently detained in jail, is being disposed of by this judgment.

3. The appellants have filed the present appeal against the aforementioned judgment and order dated 08.02.1983 on the ground that the conviction of the appellants is against the weight of the evidence on record and the sentence awarded to them is too severe.

4. The brief fact of the prosecution case is that deceased Nankoo son of the informant Khamani (PW-4) aged about 30 years and the accused appellants no. 1 and 2 Mohan and Shiam Lal are the residents of village Lakhanpur, P.S. Moosajhag, District Budaun. It is alleged that the appellant Shiam Lal is the neighbour and associate of the appellant no.1 Mohan. Rest of the accused-appellants no. 3 and 4 Sita Ram and Har Bilas are the real brothers and they are residents of village Kakora, P.S. Qadar Chowk, District Budaun. Both appellants no. 3 and 4 are alleged to be the bonded labourers of appellant no.1 Mohan. It is also alleged that at the time of occurrence the deceased was also working as a labourer under the employment of the appellant no.1 Mohan.

5. According to the prosecution case about 4 or 5 months before this incident, theft of 2 or 3 pipes allegedly took place from the tube-well of the appellant no.1. In this incident of theft the appellant no.1 suspected the complicity of the deceased, with whom some altercation was alleged to have taken place in which the appellant no.1 was said to have threatened the deceased “to realize the cost of stolen pipes from his skin”. Thereafter, on 26.01.1982 (Tuesday) at about noon, it was alleged by the informant that all the four accused persons arrived at the house of the informant in a group and took the deceased along with them on the pretext of thrashing sugarcane. The appellants going together with the deceased were alleged to be seen by Babu (PW-2) also. On the same evening, at about 6.00 p.m. one Natthu (PW-1), who was returning to his home, had seen the appellants on the well of appellant no.1 Mohan where they were beating the deceased and threatening him by saying “to realize the cost of the pipes from his skin”. Natthu (PW-1) at once informed this part of the incident to the informant Khamani (PW-4). On getting the said information, the informant, father of the deceased along with several other persons of his vicinity went to the place of the said incident to rescue his son, but his son was untraceable and the appellants, too, had disappeared from the village.

6. It is further stated in the F.I.R. that the informant searched his son on the following day i.e. 27.01.1982 and also till the afternoon of 28.01.1982 but neither the deceased nor the appellants were traceable. At last in the evening of 28.01.1982 at about 5.05 p.m. he lodged a verbal F.I.R. (Ex.K1) at Police Station Moosajhag, informing the police about disappearance and abduction of his son by the appellants, suspecting that the appellants might have committed murder of his son, which was registered as Case Crime No. 11 of 1982 under Section 364 IPC.

7. After lodging of the F.I.R. (Ex.K1), the investigation proceeding was initiated by the S.I. Moin Uddin (PW-7). Meanwhile, o