The central legal point established in the judgment is the application of section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and the interpretation of section 304 Part II in cases involving sudden fights without premeditation.

JUDGMENT : – Looking to the long pendency of this criminal appeal instead of hearing the application for suspension of sentence, with the consent of the parties this criminal appeal is heard finally. *****

The appellants have filed this appeal under section 374 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (in short “Cr.P.C.”) against the judgment dated 19-4-2014 whereby they have been convicted by 3rd Additional Session Judge, Mandsaur in Sessions Case No. 216/12 as under : –

2. As per prosecution case, on 6-7-2012, the complainant-Veeram Lal s/o Kaarulal gave information to the police that they are in possession of the agriculture land situated at Jharda-Fatehpur since last so many years. Today his father-Karulal, brother and son were on this agricultural field, all the accused persons came there with sticks on a tractor and motorcycle and started cultivating the agricultural field and when we objected to this, they assaulted us. Upon this information, an F.I.R. was registered at Crime No. 216/12 for the offence under sections 147, 148, 149, 323 and 506 of Indian Penal Code. The injured persons as well as these appellants all were medically examined by Dr. K. K. Patidar, Medical Officer, PHC, Narayangarh and all of them were found with injuries of contusions, abrasions and depression etc. Since, Veeram Lal sustained head injuries hence he succumbed, therefore, police have added section 302 and 307 of Indian Penal Code.

3. After completion of the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed. The trial was committed to the learned session Court where charges against the accused were framed. The appellants denied this by submitting that they are the actual owners and on the date of the incident in fact they were cultivating the land and the complainant party came there and started cultivating the field. They were the aggressor and assaulted the appellants. In right of defence, one of the injuries was caused by one of the appellants turned fatal, therefore, they are innocent and liable to be discharged. The prosecution has examined 19 witnesses and in defence, the appellants have examined 3 witnesses.

4. After evaluating the evidence that came on record, the learned trial Court did not give a specific finding that out of 4 appellants who caused the fatal head injury to th