Shivakant Prasad, J. - (1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30th January 01, 2008 and order dated February 01, 2008 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, 2nd Fast Track Court, Contai, Purba Medinipur, in Sessions Trial Case No. 112 (March) of 2004 convicting the appellants under Ss. 302/342/201 of the Indian Penal Code sentencing them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/ - (Two Thousand) each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for another two months under Sec. 302 of the Indian Penal Code and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year under Sec. 342 of the Indian Penal Code and also to suffer rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - (One Thousand) each, in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for another one month under Sec. 201 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) On the basis of a written complaint filed by one Sambhuram Maity, Bhupatinagar P.S. case No. 25/94 dated 09.7.1994 under Ss. 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code was started against all the FIR named accused persons on allegations that on 08.7.1994 at about 11 P.M. the accused persons in furtherance of common intention murdered his brother, Shibram Maity, on the previous night and concealed his dead body in the house of Sasanka Maity of Goramulda village. It is alleged that some villagers of Kayemgoriya and Goramulda villages were putting pressure on the father and elder brother (deceased) of the de facto complainant to return a property and on that issue four meeting were held during the last five months. In those meetings it was decided that his elder brother Shibram since deceased must pay Rs. 3,000/ - (three thousand). Since the de facto complainant and the members of his family are very poor they could not meet the said demand. On that issue on 07.7.1994 at about 5 P.M. when the deceased Shibram left his house by a bi -cycle to go to the house of his maternal uncle at Paunsi village at that time the accused No. 1 Anil Ari took the deceased to the house of Prafulla Maity by applying force. Then a meeting was held in the house of Prafully Maity on that night and the FIR named accused persons threatened the brothers and mother of the deceased that they would physically assault and kill the deceased. They kept waiting at the place of meeting till 1 A.M. on that night and the accused persons forced them to leave the place with warning that deceased would be released only if sum of Rs. 3,000/ - was paid to them by 7 A.M. of morning. When brother of the de facto complainant accompanied by Panchayat Member started for the police station to register a case, they were informed that the deceased was found dead lying in the house of the accused Sasanka Maity of Goramulda village. The de facto complainant then lodged written complaint against seventeen accused persons and against many other unknown persons.
(3.) After completion of the investigation I.O. submitted Charge -sheet against nineteen persons under the aforesaid said sections. Out of total nineteen accused persons against whom the charge was submitted, accused Sasanka Maity is still absconding and two other accused persons namely, Prafully Maity and Matangini Maity expired before commencement of the trial. Charges under Ss. 302/201/34 of the IPC were framed against the remaining sixteen accused persons who pleaded no guilty and have claimed for trial.;