PRASHANT KUMAR, J. - (1.) APPELLANTS Anil Bauri, Mathan Bauri and Sanjay Lal Bauri have challenged the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 10.10.2003 and 15.10.2003 respectively passed by Additional Sessions Judge, FTC -1, Bermo at Tenughat in Sessions Trial No. 220 of 1999 whereby and whereunder he has convicted the appellants under section 148, and 302/149 of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life under section 302/149 of the IPC. It appears that no separate sentence was passed for the offence under section 148 of the IPC. It further appears that the appellant Anil Bauri was also convicted under section 307 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo R.I. for seven years.
(2.) THE case of prosecution, in short, as per the fardbeyan of P.W. 3, is that on 13.3.1998 at about 4.45 p.m. he was returning to his house, situated at Domtoli, from Khairachatar market. His father Mangu Bauri, brothers, namely, Durga Charan Bauri and Gopal Bauri were also returning after celebrating holi in the market. They were going ahead of him. At that time the informant's mother Kamani Devi and niece Ms Namita Kumari were also in their company. It is alleged that when his father and brothers reached near open field situated at a distance of 200 yards from his house, suddenly Satish Bauri @ Banka Bauri, Mathan Bauri, Anil Bauri, Malim Bauri @ Malia Bauri, Sanjay Lal Bauri and Sachi Lal Bauri appeared armed with dagger and Bhujali and attacked on his father and brothers. In course of the said attack, several injuries were inflicted on the person of the informant's father Mangu Bauri and two brothers Durga Charan Bauri and Gopal Bauri resulting into their death on the spot. It is further alleged that when he (informant) rushed towards them, Anil Bauri and Satish Bauri with dagger attacked on him and inflicted injuries on various parts of his body with dagger and fell down. It has been stated that in the meanwhile informant's younger brother Nepal Bauri arrived and raised alarm, but he had been chased by the accused persons, however, he escaped from there but not before receiving injury on his left wrist. It is stated that the aforesaid occurrence took place because of old enmity between the two families. It is also stated that 2 -3 years ago a case and counter case had been filed and the same are still pending in court. It is stated that accused persons were trying to grab their landed property. On the basis of aforesaid fardbeyan, Kasmar P.S. Case No. 8 of 1998 under sections 302/307/326/324/34 of the IPC was instituted and police took up investigation. It appears that after completing the investigation, charge sheet u/s 147, 148, 149, 324, 326, 307 and 302 of the I. P.C., was submitted against the appellants and also against Satish Bauri @ Banke Bauri, Malin Bauri @ Malia Bauri, Sachi Lal Bauri showing them absconder. It appears that the cognizance was taken and case was committed to the court of sessions as the offence under section 302 and 307 of the IPC are exclusively triable by the court of sessions. Thereafter, charges were framed against the appellants under section 147, 148, 302 of the IPC. Against the appellant Anil Bauri, charge under section 307 of the IPC was also framed. It appears that all the charges were read over and explained to the accused persons to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.
(3.) THE prosecution examined altogether eight witnesses in support of its case. Prosecution also adduced documentary evidence i.e. Ext. - 1 series the P.M. Reports, Ext. -2 signature of informant on fardbeyan, Ext. - 3 and 3/A, the Injury reports, Ext. - 4 the fard beyan, Ext. - 5, the F.I.R. Statement of appellants was recorded under section 313 of the Cr.P.C. in which their defence is of total denial. On considering the evidence available on record, learned court below convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforesaid.;