Bharat Bhushan, J.

1. All the above three appeals stem from the common Judgment and order dated 23.3.2007, therefore, they have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

2. Appellants have assailed the common impugned judgment and order dated 23.3.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court no. 13/ Fast Track Court No. 4 Mathura in Sessions Trial No.1022 of 2004 (State Vs. Yogendra @ Khudda and others) arising out of Case Crime No.134 of 2004 under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sessions Trial No.1023 of 2004 (State Vs. Yogendra @ Khudda) arising out of Case Crime No. 135 of 2004 under Section 25 Arms Act, Police Station (P.S.) Nauhjheel District Mathura whereby appellant Yogendra @ Khudda has been convicted under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act. Remaining appellants, namely, Rakesh, Khajaan, Malkhan, Ghantoli @ Yashpal and Sanjay have been convicted under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with Section 149 IPC only. Appellants Yogendra @ Khudda, Rakesh, Khajaan, Malkhan, Ghantoli @ Yashpal and Sanjay have been sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and fine of Rs.2000/-with default stipulation. They have also been sentenced to three years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 147, 148 IPC. Appellant Yogendra @ Khudda has also been sentenced to two years rigorous imprisonment under Section 25 Arms Act and fine of Rs.500/-with default stipulation.

3. Prosecution story in brief is that relationship between appellant Yogendra @ Khudda and family of informant/complainant Prabhu (P.W.1) was antagonistic. Complainant Prabhu bought one Eicher Tractor in partnership with one Lalaram (P.W.2). Lalaram somehow received information that appellant Yogendra @ Khudda was scheming to snatch the tractor. On receiving this information, Lalaram (P.W.2) came to complainant Prabhu (P.W.1) on 9.7.2004 and called appellant Yogendra @ Khudda for questioning. Complainant Prabhu (P.W.1) and his son Mukut (deceased) were also present. Row erupted between appellant Yogendra @ Khudda and deceased Mukut but P.W. 1 Prabhu, P.W.2 Lalaram and one Habura managed to broker peace and brought deceased Mukut back to his residence.

4. After few minutes appellant Yogendra @ Khudda armed with rifle, co-appellants Rakesh armed with gun, Ghantoli armed with country made pistol, Sanjay armed with gun, Khajaan and Malkhan armed with lathies arrived at the residence of complainant Prabhu (PW1). Appellant Yogendra @ Khudda shot Mukut S/o Prabhu (complainant) using his fire arm weapon. Mukut died instantaneously. Remaining accused left the place extending threats to the complainant and his family.

5. The incident allegedly occurred at 10 am. on 9.7.2004 within P.S. Nauhjheel which was 2 kms away from village Adda Firojpur, the place of occurrence. Apparently, Adda and Firojpur are twin villages adjacent to each other. P.W. 2 Lalaram has testified that there is distance of only five hundred meters between these villages, namely, Adda and Firojpur. P.W. 1 Prabhu, father of deceased rushed towards P.S. Nauhjheel after getting a report scribed by one Digambar Singh and lodged the report.(Ext. Ka-1).

6. P.W. 5 Head Constable Promoted (HCP) Babu Lal Gautam, the then Head Moharrir of P.S. Nauhjheel recorded the FIR and made relevant entries into general diary (G.D.) of the concerned PS which is also available on record as Ext.Ka-12. A chik report (Ext. Ka-11) was also carved out. P.W. 6 Sub Inspector (S.I.) Arun Kumar, the then Station House Officer (SHO) Nauhjheel was present at the time of registration of the case. He took over the investigation and rushed towards the place of occurrence. He prepared site plan (Ext. Ka-15) and recovered one empty (315 bore) in presence of witnesses (Fard Ext. Ka-16). He also collected samples of blood stained and simple earth from the place of occurrence (Fard Ext. Ka-17). Inquest proceedings were