JUDGMENT

Hon'ble R.C. Khulbe, J.

Heard.

2. Admit.

3. Both the criminal appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 20.08.2020, passed by the 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 201 of 2018 whereby the learned Trial Court has convicted the appellants under Section 304 and 323 IPC and sentenced them ten years rigorous imprisonment under section 304 IPC with fine of Rs. 4,000/- each, in default of payment of which they have to undergo further one year rigorous imprisonment and further sentenced them one year rigorous imprisonment under section 323 IPC with fine of Rs. 1,000/- each, in default of payment of which they have to undergo further three months rigorous imprisonment. Both the sentences are directed to be run concurrently.

4. Since, both the appeals are arise out of the common judgment and order, therefore, for the sake of brevity, same are being decided by a common judgment. CRLA No. 320 of 2020 shall be considered as a leading case.

5. Brief facts of the case are that, informant-ladaitiya Devi submitted an information on 22.06.2018 with Police Station ITI, Kashipur that on 21.06.2018 at about 12:00 AM (night) her neighbour Hariom and Gurubachan (present appellants) entered in the house of the informant and committed marpeet with her husband as well as with her father-in-law. Accordingly, her husband and father-in-law received grievous injuries and her father-in-law Ram Lal succumbed to the injuries.

6. On the basis of said information, chik FIR (Ex. A6) was lodged with Police Station ITI, Kashipur, G.D. (Ex. A7) and site plan (Ex. A8) was prepared. The accused were arrested and arresting memo (Ex. A9 and Ex. A10) were prepared. The investigating officer recorded the statement of the witnesses and ultimately submitted charge sheet (Ex. A11). The concerned court took cognizance and after compliance with the provision of section 207 Cr.P.C., the case was committed to the court of Sessions Judge. Accordingly, the Sessions Judge has framed the charges under section 304, 323 and 506 IPC on 02.01.2018. The appellants denied the allegations and claimed to be tried.

7. In order to prove its case, prosecution got examined PW1 Ladaitiya Devi (informant) who proved the information (Ex. A1), PW2 Hemraj Singh (son of the deceased) has proved the panchnama (Ex. A2), PW3 Jyoti, is the eye witness who narrated the entire story, as alleged in the FIR, PW4 Dr. Jasveer Singh, who prepared the medical reports of Ramlal (Ex. A3 and Ex. A4), PW5 Dr. Vikas Gahlot, who conducted the post mortem of the deceased and prepared the post mortem report (Ex. A5), PW6 Hemant Manral has proved the chik FIR (Ex. A6) and G.D. (Ex. A7) and PW7 S.I. Kaushal Bhakuni, recorded the statements of the witnesses, arrested the appellants, prepared the arresting memo (Ex. A9 and Ex. A10) and after completion of the investigation submitted charge sheet (Ex. A11).

8. After completion of the prosecution evidence, statements of the appellants under section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded in which they stated that the prosecution has produced false evidence against them. However, in defence, no evidence was produced.

9. After hearing both the parties, learned trial Court convicted the appellants and sentenced them as mentioned in paragraph no.1 of the judgment.

10. Feeling aggrieved by the order of conviction and sentence, the present appeals are preferred before this Court.

11. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant as well as learned counsel for the State.

12. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellants that he does not want to argue the case on merit as the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellants based on sufficient material on record; there is no illegality in the impugned findings regarding conviction but he fairly submits that both the appellants are real brothers and are sole bread earner of their family, there is no criminal antecedent of both the appellant; they have served more t