1. Both these Appeals are decided by this common Judgment because they arise out of the same Sessions Case.

2. The Appellants have challenged the Judgment and Order dated 07/11/2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mangaon, District Raigad in Sessions Case No.11/2014. The Appellants were the Original Accused Nos.1 and 2. The learned Judge convicted the Appellants for commission of the offences punishable under S.302 read with S.34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. They were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default to suffer S.I. for two months. They were granted set - off under S.428 of CrPC for the period which they had spent in custody since their arrest on 03/12/2013.

3. Heard Mr. Shashikant Chaudhari, learned Counsel for the Appellants and Ms. Geeta Mulekar, learned APP for the Respondent - State.

4. The prosecution case is that the deceased Prashant Vijayaji was a Priest in a Jain Temple at village Potner near MumbaiGoa Highway. Both the Appellants were labourers. They were doing labour work in connection with some construction in the temple. They wanted Rs.1000/- for the job that they had done. The deceased Prashant Vijayaji refused to pay them that amount instead he offered to pay Rs.500/-. Both of them got angry. On 02/12/2013, at about 10:30 p.m., when the deceased was alone in his room, both the Appellants assaulted him with an iron pipe and a knife on his head. The accused remained inside the room. The room was bolted from inside. Another priest in the next room heard the shouts of the deceased. He understood that some untoward incident had taken place. He telephonically called the other prominent members of their community. They rushed to the spot. They forced open the door and found that the deceased was lying in a pool of blood. The Appellant - (Accused No.2) Prakash was lying nearby and the Appellant - (Accused No.1) Phularam was hiding himself in a corner. Both the accused - Appellants were apprehended at the spot. An iron rod and a knife lay nearby. In the meantime, the police were informed. They reached the spot shortly.

5. PW - 1 who was at the spot, gave his FIR. The Appellants were arrested. The investigation commenced. The dead body was sent for Post Mortem examination. The statements of the witnesses were recorded. Some of the statements were recorded under S.164 of CrPC and at the conclusion of the investigation, the chargesheet was filed. The case was committed to the Court of Session and was tried before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mangaon.

6. During trial, the prosecution examined 12 witnesses including the other priest from the temple, the persons who had rushed to the spot on being informed about the incident, the photographer, the panchas and the Police Officers who had taken part in the investigation.

7. The defence of the Appellants in their statements recorded under S.313 of CrPC, was of denial and in addition, stated that they had come to the temple two days prior to the incident. They were given accommodation. Before that, they had no concern with the deceased. When the incident occurred, both of them were sleeping in their room. The people from their community came to their room and assaulted them. Those persons handed them in the custody of police. They had no relatives. They were from Rajasthan. They were implicated falsely.

8. The learned Judge disbelieved their defence. He relied on the circumstances produced by the prosecution through their evidence. Learned Judge also repelled the contention that it could be an offence under S.304(II) of IPC based on the attending circumstances. He recorded his finding of guilt as mentioned earlier.

9. PW - 1 Kantilal Osawal had lodged the FIR. He has deposed that he was having his general store at Indapur, Taluka Mangaon. There was a Jain Temple at village Potner adjacent to Mumbai - Goa Highway. PW - 2 Chandreshbhai Ratava was a priest in the temple. He used to reside in t