B.N.P.SINGH, J. - (1.)GRAVAMEN of accusations against 16 number of accused persons are that in the early morning, at about 6.30 a.m. on 26th October, 1985, while Jagdish Yadav (P.W.10) had gone to the house of Kurha Yadav to see his ailing aunt, they holding fire arms, opened fire, gained their access in the inner apartment of house, shot shower of bullets, and three female members and a minor child as such, sustained injuries on their persons. The accusation against five accused persons was that they from the tiled roof of the house, took recourse to firing when Anugrah Yadav, son of Jagdish Yadav, sustained fatal injuries at the hands of Chandeshwar Yadav. Accusation against rest five number of accused persons was that they standing outside the house, with arms, allegedly assaulted Vijay Yadav and Subhash Yadav. Motive assigned behing the incident was an attempt, made by Ghura Mistry to get possession of three decimals of land in Barahi Bazaar, which had been purchased by father of Jagdish Yadav from Chandradip Sao. The fardbeyan of Jagdish Yadav with these accusations, was recorded at 14.45 hours on 26th October, 1985 by Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, Officer Incharge, Rafiganj Police Station, on strength of which first information report was drawn up, and investigation commenced.
(2.)AFTER Police had been set in motion, investigating Officer (P.W.13) visited place of occurrence, recorded statement of witnesses, got injured examined by doctor, autopsy held over the dead body of Anugrah Yadav, prepared inquest report, seized blood stained earth, and on receipt of autopsy report, eventually laid charge sheet before the Court. In the eventual trial, that commenced, the State examined altogether 14 witnesses, who were family members of the deceased, some of those, who demonstrated their familiarity with the incident, two doctors, Police Officer and also formal witnesses.
Defence of the appellants both before the court below and this Court had been plain denial of entire allegations and they ascribed their false implication, due to land dispute persisting with Ghura Mistry, in aid of whom, appellants had resorted to violence. The defence too had chosen to examine five number of witnesses ostensibly to counter allegations attributed to the appellants, and Chandeshwar Yadav, who was suggested to be assailant of Anugrah Yadav (deceased), also took plea of alibi to persuade court to believe his physical Impossibility of presence at the place of occurrence at the material time of incident. The trial court, however, negativing plea of innocence of the accused persons, while acquitted those who had been saddled with the allegation of assault, theft and committing offence of rioting under section 147 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) recorded conviction against Chandeshwar Yadav under section 302/149 IPC and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. Though Chandeshwar Yadav also stood charged under section 302 IPC simpliciter no finding appears to have been explicitly recorded by the trial court on this score. Though rest appellants too were charged under section 302/149 IPC, no explicit finding was recorded on this count too. As for appellant Ramadhyan Yadav, and rest 24 accused persons (excluding Chandeshwar Yadav), the trial court recorded finding of guilt under section 307/149 IPC and they too were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. Ramadhyan Yadav and 19 others were also convicted under section 27 of the Arms Act for which they were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years. All the sentences were, however, directed to run concurrently.

(3.)THOUGH all the 26 number of accused persons who on some count, suffered conviction and were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for different terms, it seems that Ram Briksh Mistry, who was one of the appellants, died during pendency of the appeal and as such, appeal as against him, stood abated.