SINGH, J. - (1.) IN this appeal, appellants have challenged the judgment dated 15. 10. 2004 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Chhabra, District Baran, whereby each of appellants Balkishan, Mograj @ Yograj, Prahlad and Mangu @ Mangilal were convicted and sentenced as under:- Appellant Balkishan u/s. 302 IPC: Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to further suffer two month's simple imprisonment; u/s. 323/34 IPC: to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. u/s. 324/34 IPC: to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 9 months. u/s. 341 IPC: to suffer 15 days simple imprisonment. u/s. 379 IPC: to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. Appellants Mograj @ Yograj, Prahlad and Mangu alias Mangilal u/s. 302/34 IPC: to suffer imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 1000/-, each, in default each of them to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for two months. u/s. 323/34 IPC: Each of them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. u/s. 324/34 IPC: Each of them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 9 months. u/s. 341 IPC, accused Moghraj and u/s. 341/34 IPC accused Prahlad and Mangu alias Mangilal, to suffer simple imprisonment for 15 days each. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case is that on 1. 2. 2001 at 9. 20 p. m. at Government Hospital Chhabra, `parcha Bayan' of the injured Ranglal, resident of Govindpuri was recorded by Sub- Inspector Tej Singh, Police Station Chhabra. According to `parcha Bayan', the land belonging to the informant was situated to adjoining land of his uncle Prem Narain. On the aforesaid day at 2 p. m. there was an altercation between the informant and Balkishan regarding cutting of water- pipe by Bal Kishan, who had inflicted a sickle blow at his back. Then the informant went to his house and reported the matter to his brother Gopi Lal and then informant along with his brother Ramesh, Gopi Lal, Ram Prasad and Morpal went to the field to conciliate the matter. On arriving near their field, Bal Kishan and his brother Mangu, Prahlad and Mograj came armed and started beating. Bal Kishan inflicted `gandashi' blow on his cheek near the left eye, Prahlad inflicted `gandasi-stick blow on left leg, Mangu inflicted' dhariya' blow on left elbow and Mograj inflicted lathi blow on left elbow and when the informant fell down, Moghraj inflicted 3-4 blows. When his brother Kalyan came to save him, Bal Kishan inflicted a `gandasi blow' on head with the intention to kill him causing him to fall down. Then Moghraj inflicted lathi blows on his back. When other brothers of the informant namely, Ram Prasad, Ramesh, Gopi Lal, Morpal, tried to save themselves, they were also inflicted injuries by them. Mother of the informant Ramnathi Bai also sustained lathi blow inflicted by Moghraj. Then, the accused persons ran away towards their well and Kalyan, who had sustained a serious head injury was taken to hospital at Chhabra where he was declared dead. On the above report a case under Sections 302, 307, 341, 323, 379/34 IPC was registered at 10 p. m. on 1. 12. 01 and the investigation commenced. During the investigation, site map and other memos were prepared, autopsy on the dead body of Kalyan was got conducted and after investigation, charge sheet against the accused persons was filed. On the case being committed, the accused Balkishan was charged for the offence under Sections 302, 307, 323, 341, 201, 379 IPC, accused Prahlad and Mangu alias Mangi Lal under Sections 302/34, 307, 323/34, 341/34 IPC and accused Mograj alias Yograj for the offence under Sections 302, 307, 323, 341, 201 IPC. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined as many as 22 witnesses and then the statements of the accused under Sections 313 Cr. P. C. were recorded. In their explanation, the accused stated that they were falsely implicated and they did not inflict injuries as alleged. In defence, accused produced themselves as D. W. 1 Bal Kishan, D. W. 2 Mograj and D. W. 3 Prahlad u/s. 315 Cr. P. C. On hearing rival submissions, learned trial Judge convicted the appellants for the offences indicated herein above. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants, learned Public Prosecutor for the State and with their assistance scanned the material on record. Death of Kalyan was undeniably homicidal in nature.
(3.) AS per post mortem report (Ex. P. 13) the following ante mortem injuries were found on the body:-      " (1) Incised wound 10 cm x 2 cm x 3 cm parieto occipital region of skull centrally placed anterior posteriorly. (2) Abrasion 3 cm x 2 cm right upper forearm posteriorly. (3) Abrasion 2 cm x 1 cm right side of forehead above eyelid. (4) Abrasion 10 cm x 2 cm right scapular and infra scapular region posterior. " In the opinion of doctor, the cause of death was coma as a result of head injury. Ramesh (PW. 7) vide injury report (Ex. P. 17) received following injuries:- (1) Pain with swelling 4 cm x 4 cm rt. shoulder region. Ram Nathi (PW. 11) vide injury report (Ex. P. 18) received following injuries:- (1) Bruise 6 cm x 2 cm rt. Shoulder region; (2) Bruise 4 cm x 2 cm inter scapular region. ;