S.S. Byas, J. - (1.)Since these two appeals one by accused Puran Ram and the other by accused Munshi Ram and Dhanna Ram arise out of one and the same judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Sri Ganganagar dated April 13, 1979, they are heard together and are being disposed of by a common judgment. The appellants were Convicted and sentenced as under : JUDGEMENT_44_LAWS(RAJ)4_19841.html Substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.
(2.)Succinctly stated and prosecution case is that appellants Munshi Ram and Dhanna Ram are the sons of appellant Puran Ram. They reside in village Odki district Ganganagar. The deceased-victim Trilok Singh was the son of PW 11 Nand Singh. Nand Singh has one more son by name Anokba Singh. PW 12 Nirmal alias Nimba aged about 12-13 years at the time of incident is the son of Anokha Singb. They reside in Chak No. 9 Rs.and Chak No. D-3 in district Ganga Nagar. The appellant Puran Ram made an agreement on Aug. 24, 1976 to sell his agricultural land Murabba No. 47 measuring 241/2 Bighas situate in Chak No. 9-D to Anokha Singh for a sum of Rs. 60,000.00 A sum of Rs. 40,000.00 was to be paid to him later on at the time of registration of the Sale-deed. The possession of the land was also delivered to Anokha Singh on that very day along with the execution of agreement Ex. P. 37. Puran Ram executed this agreement in writing which is Ex. P. 37. Since that day Anokha Singh was cultivating the aforesaid agricultural field. A few days before the occurrence (December 13, 1977) Anokha Singh was arrested in some criminal case. As such he requested his father Nand Singh and brother Trilok Singh to look-after his aforesaid land and to carry on cultivation in it so that the land may not remain uncultivated. At about 9.00 A. M. on Dec. 13, 1977 the three appellants went to the aforesaid land. PW 11 Nand singh PW 12 Nimma alias Nirmal and the deceased victim Triloksingh were working there in that field. Accused Puran Ram had a lathi while accused Munshi Ram and Dhanna Ram had Gandasis with them. They asked Nand Singh and Trilok singh to leave the field and go away from there. Nand Singh and Triloksingh replied that since the field was in the possession of Anokhasingh, they were unable to leave it. This annoyed and umbraged the appellant. They made an assault on Triloksingh and landed blows to him with the lathi and Gandasi they had in their hands. It resulted in a merciless and severe beating of Triloksingh. He sustained numerous injuries on his body. When Nandsingh (PW 11) tried to intervene, he too was not spared and was landed blows by the three appellants. There was profuse bleeding from the wounds of Triloksingh. The appellants even then did not relent and took Nand Singh and Triloksingh along with Nimma to their village Odki and put them outside the garrage of one Banarsidas. Triloksingh passed away after some time on that very day. PW 13 Badru Ram, the A. S. I. Police, Police Station, Hindumal Kot reached village Odki at about 4.00 P. M. on Dec. 13, 1977 in connection with the investigation in Criminal Case No. 157, 1977. There he found Triloksingh dead and PW 11 Nandsingh sitting by his side out side the garrage of Banarsidas. He recorded Nandsingh's statement Ex. P. 23 at about 4.45 P. M. Nandsingh gave the full account of the incident in his statement. A case was registered on the basis of Ex. P. 23 taking it to be the F. I. R. The A. S. I. Badruiam prepared the inquest report of the victim's dead body. He also prepared the site plan after inspecting the site. The post mortem examination of the dead body of Trilok singh was conducted at about 10.00 A. M. on Dec. 14, 1977 by PW 6 Dr. K. N. Markenday.the then Medical Officer In charge, Primary Health Centre, Shivpuri. He noticed the following injuries on his dead body : External injuries
1. Incised wound 2" x 1/4" x bone deep on the left parietal bone.

2. Lacerated wound 11/2" x 1/2" x bone deep on the right parietal bone.

3. Lacerated wound 1/2" x 1/2" x 1/4" on the left parietal bone.

4. Contusion 2" x 1" on the right temporal region.

5. Lacerated wound 2" x 2" x triangular in shape on the right leg laterally near ankle joint.

6. Contusion 1" x 1/2" on the back of left thigh upper part.

7. Contusion 2" x 3/4" on the back of left thigh at middle.

8. Contusion 1" x 3/4" on the back of left thigh above knee.

9. Contusion 1" x 3/4" on the right side of back at middle of thorax.

10. Contusion 1/2" x 1/2" on the right side of back above 12th rib.

11. Contusion 2" x 1/2" on the right side of back on injury No. 10 near vertebral column.

12. Contusion 1/2" x ⅓" on the back at middle on vertebral column.

13. Contusion 1/2" x ⅓" on the left side of the back upper part.

14. Contusion 1/2" x 1/2" on the left side of back at middle.

15. Contusion 1" x 1/2' x 3* below injury No. 14.

16. Contusion 11/2' x 1" x 1" below injury No. 15.

17. Abrasion 1/4" x 1/10 x irregular near injury No. 16.

18. Contusion 1" x 1/2" on the back of left shoulder.

19. Contusion 1" x 1/4" on the left shoulder.

20. Contusion 4" x 1" on the left side of back at middle.

21. Contusion 4" x 1" on the left side of back near injury No. 20.

22. Contusion 1/2" x 1/2" on the left side of buttock laterally.

23. Contusion 6" x 1" x oblique on the right buttock,

24. Abrasion 1" x 1/2" on the lateral side of left elbow.

25. Contusion 2" x 1/2" on the back of left fore arm at middle.

26. Contusion 1" x 1/2" on the left forearm at lower one third.

27. Contusion 1" x 1/2" on the back of right little finger.

28. Abrasion 1/2" x 1/2" x irregular between the middle and ring finger o.' right hand on the back.
Internal
1. Fracture of left parietal bone.

2. Fracture of 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10th ribs at left side.

3. Fracture of 10th rib of right side.
In the opinion of Dr. Markanday, the cause of death of the victim was hock and hemorrhage due to injuries to the left lung. The post mortem examination report issued by him is Ex. P. 22.
(3.)On the same day he examined the injuries of PW 11 Nand Singh and found the following injuries:
1. Lacerated wound 1" x 1/4" 1/4" on the back of right fore-arm just below elbow.

2. Lacerated wound 3/4" x 1/4" x muscle deep on the third of right leg.

3. Lacerated wound 1/2" x 1/4" x muscle deep on the lower one third of right leg.

4. Swelling around the left elbow and upper part of left forearm and lower portion of left arm.

5. Contusion 2" x 1" x oblique on the right side of back laterally at middle.
The report issued by him is Ex. P. 21. On X-ray examination, fracture of left humorous and fractures of 5,6,7,8, and 10th ribs were detected. The appellants were arrested. In consequence of the disclosure statements made by them, one lathi was recovered at the instance of accused Puranram while two Gandasies were recovered at the instance of appellants Munsiram and Dhannaram. The seized articles were sent for chemical examination. Human blood was detected on one of the Gandasies. On the completion of investigation, the police presented a challan against accused Puran Ram, Munsiram and Dhannaram in the Court of Judicial Magistrate (2), Ganganagar, who in his turn committed the accused-appellants for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge, Ganganagar framed charges under sections 447, 323/34, 325/34, 302/34 and 342, Penal Code against each of them, to which they pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. The defence taken by accused Puranram was that of complete denial and alibi. According to nim he war not present at the place of occurrence when the incident is alleged to have taken place. The defence taken by Munsiram and Dhannaram was that the field in dispute was it their possession since long. Their father Puranram (accused) was on bad term with them. He, therefore, made a fictitious agreement in favour of Anokharam to sell the land to him. On the day of incident, Nands Singh and Trilok Singh (deceased-victim) came to the said field and wanted to make unlawful possession over it They (appellants) refused to deliver the possession to Triloksingh and Nandsingh, Thereafter Triloksingh and Nandsingh made an assault on them and landed blows to them with lathies. The police had suppressed the real facts and presented only t lop sided version of the incident. The appellants denied that they struck any blot to the deceased-victim. It was also said that even if it is taken that they struck blows to the deceased-victim, they were inflicted in exercise of the right of private defence of person and property. In support of its case the prosecution examined 74 witnesses and filed some documents. In defence, the accused examined out witness. On the conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge recorded hit findings as under:
1. The field in dispute was in possession of the complainant party;

2. the appellants were the aggressors;

3. the appellants had formed a common intention to cause the murder Trilok Singh and in pursuance to it they killed him;

4. the appellants voluntarily caused simple and grievous hurts to PW Nandsingh.

5. the injuries found on the person of accused Munshiram and Dhannar were superficial. The injuries do not indicate that they were receive by them in this very incident, and

6. no right of private defence of person or property was available to appellants.
The defence was rejected and the charges were held proved. The appellant were consequently convicted and sentenced as mentioned at the very out-Aggrieved against their conviction and sentence the appellants have come-up appeals.