MUSHTAQ AHMAD, J. - (1.) SATYA Narain, Shakur, Shyam Behari, Earn Abhilakh Sami Ullah, Earn Behari, Mohammad Eaza, Sant Ram, and Mt. Naozadi (on bail) appeal against their conviction and sentences passed by the learned Sessions Judge of Jaunpur. The first eight of the appellants were convicted under s, 396 and sentenced each to transportation for life, Earn Abhilakh, appellant 4, being also convicted under Section 19 (f), Arms Act, and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment, and the last appellant, who is the mother of Ram Abhilakh, appellant 4, was con. victed under 9. 412, I. P. C., and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment. There were ten other persons also charged under either on both of these sections, but they were all acquitted.
(2.) THE occurrence which became the subject of the charge had taken place on the night between 1st and 2nd of March 1949, at village Bhilampur, seven miles from the police station Sujanganj, district Jaunpur. As a result of what happened one Jageshar Pasi died, having received as many as ten injuries according to the post mortem report. A report of the incident was lodged by Dwarka Frasad, in whose house the alleged dacoity had been committed at 8 -20 the next morning, in which only Sant Ram appellant was mentioned by name and 25 or 26 others without names as dacoits by the informant. It may be noted that Sant Ram's name is really stated in the report as Satya Narain, but that was only an alias for Sant Bam, it being necessary to mention this as appellant 1 in this appeal is also named Satya Narain. It may further be noted that this Sant Bam whose name is mentioned in the report is alleged to have been arrested on the spot and was not, therefore, put up for identification by the. witnesses either at Jaunpur or at Partapgarh where different batches of the accused were identi -fied by different batches of the. witnesses.
(3.) MR . S. N. Mulla argued this appeal oil behalf of Satya Narain and Sami Ullah, appellants l and 5 respectively, while the other appellants were represented before us by Mr. Baqar Usmani. Naturally, in the course of the arguments on behalf of Satya Narain and Sami Ullah those portions of the record were also brought to our notice which were germane only to the cases of the other appellants, there being no doubt, a; number of common features between the case of the appellants 1 and 5 and that of the other appellants.;