Vishnu Sahai, J. - (1.) THROUGH these appeals, Sunil Singh, Rakesh Pandey, Sunil Bajpai, Udyot Kumar Shukla, Mohan and Santosh Kumar challenge the judgment and order dated 10.12.1998, passed by the IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow in Sessions Trial No. 10 of 1994, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced in the manner stated hereinafter : (a) Under Section 148, I.P.C. to one year's R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 each ; in default two months' R.I. (b) Under Section 302/149, I.P.C. to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 each, in default two months' R.I. (c) Under Section 323/149, I.P.C. to six months' R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 each ; in default two months R.I. (d) Under Section 379, I.P.C. to six months' R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 500 each ; in default two months' R.I. Their substantive sentences, on all the counts, have been directed to run concurrently.
(2.) IT is pertinent to mention that Criminal Appeal No. 42 of 1999 has been preferred by Sunil Singh ; Criminal Appeal No. 43 of 1999 by Rakesh Pandey ; Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 1999 by Sunil Bajpai ; Criminal Appeal No. 47 of 1999 by Udyot Kumar Shukla ; and Criminal Appeal No. 714 of 1998 by Mohan and Santosh Kumar. Since all these appeals arise out of a common factual matrix and impugned judgment we are disposing them off by one judgment. Shortly stated, the prosecution case runs as under : "The informant Arun Sinha, P.W. 1 was the friend of the deceased Satish Srivastava. At the time of the incident both of them were living in Chitragupta Nagar, within the limits of police station Krishna Nagar, district Lucknow. There was ill-will between Satish Srivastava on one hand and the appellants on the other, as in a wedding the former had insulted the latter. On 17.8.1993 at about 8.45 p.m., while Satish Srivastava on his scooter, along with the informant Arun Sinha was proceeding to his uncle's house in Prem Nagar and had reached Pavlel Shopping Complex, situated in front of Shiv Mangal's flour mill, they saw the six appellants, namely, Sunil Singh, Rakesh Pandey, Sunil Bajpai Udyot Kumar Shukla, Mohan and Santosh Kumar, all friends inter se, armed with knives, standing near the said flour mill. The appellants asked Satish Srivastava and Arun Sinha to stop for two minutes. Thereupon, Satish Srivastava stopped his scooter. Then Rakesh Pandey told Satish Srivastava that he had insulted him in a barat (wedding procession) and would be dealt with. Thereafter the six appellants started assaulting Satish Srivastava with knives. When Arun Sinha tried to save him, a knife blow was inflicted on his head. He raised cries, hearing which a number of people of the locality, whose names he did not know, came, but none of them mustered courage to save them. Thereafter, the appellants took them to a pond situated behind the akhara. Thinking Satish Srivastava to be dead, the appellants, after leaving them there, ran away. The incident was seen by Arun Sinha and those assembled there in electric light, which was available at the place of the incident.
(3.) THE evidence of S.I., Om Prakash Agnihotri P.W. 3 shows that on 17.8.1993, while he was on patrol duty on a jeep, he received information about the incident and reached the place of the incident. He found the informant Arun Sinha and Satish Srivastava in a pond situated near akhara. He took them in the jeep to Civil Hospital, Lucknow. On the way Satish Srivastava breathed his last. On reaching Civil Hospital, he left Arun Sinha and the corpse of Satish Srivastava there. The evidence of the informant Arun Sinha shows that in Civil Hospital, Lucknow, the father and the brother of the deceased Satish Srivastava and one Jitendra Kumar alias J. K. Lal came. He dictated the F.I.R. (Ext. Ka-1) to J. K. Lal and asked him to lodge it at the police station.;