AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J. - (1.) All the above-mentioned three criminal appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment dated 26/07/2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.-III, Bokaro in Sessions Trial No. 154 of 1985 and, therefore, they were taken up and heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) All these appellants alongwith one another Ganga Narayan Mahto (since acquitted) were put on trial for the charges under Sections 148, 307, 302,109/149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. By the impugned judgment the appellant Lal Mohan Mahato and Haripad Mahato of Cr. Appeal No. 1039 of 2005 were convicted for the offence under Sections 148, 302/149 and 307/149 IPC and they were sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of two years for the offence under Section 148 IPC and R.I. for life and fine of Rs. 10,000/- each for the offence under Section 302 /149 IPC and R.I. for eight years for the offence under Section 307/149 IPC and for the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act they were sentenced to undergo R. I. of a period of three years. The appellants Jitlal Mahato @ Jeetu Mahato and Binod Kumar Mahato of Cr. Appeal No. 1066 of 2005 were convicted for the offence under Sections 148, 302/149 and 307/149 IPC and they were sentenced to undergo R.I. for two years for the offence under Section 148 IPC, R.I. for life for the offence under Section 302 /149 IPC and R.I. for a period of eight years for the offence under Section 307/149 IPC. So far as the appellant Nathan Mahato of Cr. Appeal No. 1249 of 2005 is concerned, he was convicted for the offence under Sections 148, 302 and 307/149 IPC and he was sentenced to undergo R.I. for a period of two years under Section 148 IPC, R.I. for life for the offence under Section 302 IPC and R.I. for a period of eight years for the offence under Section 307/149 IPC. The sixth accused Ganga Narayan Mahato was however, acquitted by the trial Court from all the charges.
(3.) Initially on the basis of the information lodged by one Devnandan Mahato an FIR was registered being Balidih P. S. Case No. 60/1984 wherein it was alleged that on that day at about 10.00 a.m. the accused Nathan Mahato came drunk and started abusing the brother and father of the informant Devnandan Mahato. Meanwhile Jeetu Mahato, Binod Kumar Mahato, Haripada Mahato came there armed with Tangi and Lathi and started assaulting the brother and father of the informant due to which the father of the informant sustained sharp cutting injury on his hand caused by Tangi blow. The FIR was registered under Section 324/323 IPC. One another FIR was registered on the basis of the information lodged by Dwarika Ram Mahato, i.e. the father of Devnandan Mahato on 22-7-2005 at 14.15 hour wherein he alleged that on the same day at about 10.00 a.m. some quarrel took place in between the son of the informant and the appellants and others on the other side in connection with a dispute regarding ownership of a water pipe and in course thereof some of the accused inflicted Tangi blow upon the informant. The information was given to the police with regard to the same occurrence. It is stated that after about half an hour Haripada Mahato and Lal Mohan Mahato came there armed with gun and pistol and they challenged the informant party. The three sons of the informant namely, Ram Pd. Mahato, Ram Kurnar Mahato and Dhiren Mahato were standing there. Lal Mohan fired a shot from his firearm on the right thigh of Ram Prasad Mahato and Nathan Mahato inflicted sword blow on the neck of Dhiren Mahato. He also assaulted Ram Prasad. In the said incident Dhiren Mahato was killed. The cause of occurrence was said to be the old dispute between the parties.;