AMARESHWAR SAHAY, J. - (1.) BOTH the appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment dated 04/09/2000 passed by the Additional Judicial Commissioner, Lohardaga in Sessions Trial Nos. 390 of 1997/ 37 of 1997 and, therefore, they were taken up and heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) THE appellant Sugendra Sai, appellant in Cr. Appeal No. 404/2000 and the appellants Ram Nandan Sai @ Ram Sai and Sheo Nandan Sai @ Sibu Sai, appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 407/2000, were convicted under Sections 302/34 IPC and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act and they were sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the offence under Sections 302/34 IPC and were further sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years for the offence under Section 27 of the Arms Act. However, both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. Though the appellants were further charged for the offence under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Explosive Substance Act but they were acquitted from the said charges. The case of the prosecution in short is that one Bahura Sai lodged a First Information Report by giving his fardbeyan on 22/12/1996 wherein he alleged that he alongwith is nephew Dhurwa Sai (the deceased) was going to Bhandra on bicycles. When they reached near the Railway Signal of Nagjuwa Station, these three appellants and one Sabuj Ansari came there and surrounded them and, thereafter, the appellant Ram Nandan Sai @ Ram Sai fired from his pistol upon Dhurwa Sai. Dhurwa Sai started running away from there but all the four accused persons chased him. In course of chasing, they were also hurling bombs and were firing from their pistols. Dhurwa Sai though received bomb injuries but he continued to run away but all the four accused persons caught hold of him and, thereafter, they fired shot on him as a result of which Dhurwa Sai died at the spot. In the Fardbeyan it was further alleged that there was enmity in between the deceased and the accused persons and the appellant Ram Nandan Sai. had also attempted on his life on earlier occasions.
(3.) THE charge sheet was submitted only against these three appellants and so far as the fourth accused Sabuj Ansari is concerned, since he was absconding, the investigation continued against him.;