JUDGMENT T. Ramabhadran, J. - The appellant, Ram Narain, aged about 20 years, a resident of village Nand Khas, Police Station Chirgaon, District Jhansi, has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge of that district of three offences under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer death. He was further convicted under Section 380 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment thereunder. Against his conviction and sentence, Ram Narain has come up in appeal. The Sessions Judge has also made the usual reference for the confirmation of the death sentence inflicted upon the appellant on the murder charge. In this appeal and the connected reference we have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The prosecution case, briefly, was as follows :- On the night intervening September 18 and 19, 1964, Rameshwar Prasad, aged about 40 years, his wife Smt. Avadh Kunwar also aged about 40 years and his mother-in-law Smt. Sajrani, aged about 65 years, were murdered inside the house of the last-mentioned in 4 village Nansis. The murder was discovered the following morning when Narendra, the minor son of Rameshwar Prasad, aged about six years, started crying from the roof of the house. On hearing his cries, Kashi Ram (P.W. 5) and other inhabitants of the locality went to the house of the deceased and 3 got it opened from inside by Narendra. On entering the house, they found Rameshwar Prasad, Smt. Avadh Kunwar and Smt. Sajrani lying murdered. The boxes inside the house were found broken open and some of the contents lying scattered. Intimation of the gruesome murder was sent to Smt. Gyan Devi (P. F. 1) and Smt. Sharda (P.W. 2), daughters of Rameshwar Prasad. Smt. Gyan Devi, on arrival, prepared a list (Exhibit Ka 1) of the stolen property. Before the arrival of Smt. Gyan Devi, intimation of the occurrence had been sent to P. S. Chirgaon, five miles away, by Kashi Ram (P.W. 5). That report reached the Thana at 8-30 p.m. Station Officer. Chirgaon, Virendra Pal Singh (P.W. 18) immediately set out for village Nansia. He inspected the scene of occurrence, held an inquest on the three dead bodies and sent the same for postmortem examination. A list of stolen property (Ex. Ka 1) was also handed over to him on the spot. That report reached the Thana at 8-30 p.m. Station Officer. Chirgaon, Virendra Pal Singh (P.W. 18) immediately set out for village Nansia. He inspected the scene of occurrence, held an inquest on the three dead bodies and sent the same for postmortem examination. A list of stolen property (Ex. Ka 1) was also handed over to him on the spot. During his inspection of the site, the S.O. found two mirrors (Exs. 2 and 3) among the various articles lying scattered in the kotha. Since these mirrors bore some finger prints, the S. O. took them in possession and sealed them in two separate cartons. The appellant was arrested on September 27, 1964 by the police of P. S. Bhander (Madhya Pradesh) acting on 'information supplied by some informers. It may be mentioned that the Station Officer, Chirgaon had already requested the Station Officer of Bhander (M. P.) to be on the look out of Ram Narain who had relations in village Ajitpura within the jurisdiction of P. S. Bhander. During interrogation at P. S. Bhander, the appellant handed over a pair of gold Balis (Ex. 1) to the Station Officer of Bhander. These were sealed. Intimation of the arrest of the appellant was then communicated to P. S. Chirgaon. Circle Inspector, Suraj Bhan Singh (P.W. 19) of district Jhansi, accompanied by Station Officer, Chirgaon, then proceeded to Bhander. Specimen finger prints of the appellant were taken on October 6, 1964 before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Datia (Madhya Pradesh) Sri H. C. Kamthan (P.W. 10). The appellant was subsequently transferred to district Jail, Jhansi. The gold balis, which were recovered from the appellant were put up for identification and similarly, the specimen finger prints of the appellant were sent to the Finger Print Expert, Scientific Section, C.I.D. U.P., Lucknow, along with the mirrors (Exs. 2 and 3) which, as already indicated, were found among the scattered Droperties at the scene of occurrence on September 19, 1964. On receipt of the result of the identification of the gold balis and the report of the Finger Print Expert, the appellant was charge-sheeted under Section 302 I.P.C. and other sections. 2 and 3) which, as already indicated, were found among the scattered Droperties at the scene of occurrence on September 19, 1964. On receipt of the result of the identification of the gold balis and the report of the Finger Print Expert, the appellant was charge-sheeted under Section 302 I.P.C. and other sections. After preliminary inquiry in the court of the committing magistrate, the appellant was committed to the court of Sessions where, as already indicated, he was convicted of three offences under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. and one offence under Section 380 I.P.C. and sentenced to death and seven years rigorous imprisonment respectively. 3. Examined by the committing magistrate, the appellant totally denied the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution. He denied that the mirrors (Exs. 2 and 3) bore his finger impressions. He similarly denied that the two gold balis Ex. 1 were produced by him to the police at P. S. Bhander. He alleged false implication. 4. In the trial court, while adhering his former statement, the appellant added that on the day of occurrence, he was in village Pahargaon, police station Ronch. He reiterated his innocence and once again alleged falsely implication. He, however, admitted that his specimen thumb impressions were taken in the presence of the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Datia on October 6, 1964. but denied that the mirrors (Exs. 2 and 3) bore his finger prints. When questioned regarding the injuries found on his person on September 28, 1964, his explanation was that he was beaten by the police station Bhander, who then got him examined at the dispensary at Bhander. No defence, however, was adduced. 5. There can be no doubt that Rameshwar Prasad, his wife Smt. Avadh Kunwar and his mother-in-law Smt. Sajrani were brutally murdered on the night in question. The postmortem examination on their dead bodies was performed by Dr. B. L. Agarwal, the then Civil Surgeon. Jhansi on September 20, 1964. The three victims had been dead about 1 to 2 days. All the three dead bodies bore incised injuries on the neck cutting the blood vessels. The death of the three victims was due to the incised wounds on the neck resulting in shook and hemorrhage vide post mortem reports Ex. Ka 2 to Ka 4 In the opinion of the Doctor, the incised injuries could have been caused by some heavy sharp cutting weapon. The death of the three victims was due to the incised wounds on the neck resulting in shook and hemorrhage vide post mortem reports Ex. Ka 2 to Ka 4 In the opinion of the Doctor, the incised injuries could have been caused by some heavy sharp cutting weapon. It is obvious, therefore, that there has been foul play and the three unfortunate victims were brutally murdered on the night in question, their necks having been cut by some heavy sharp edged weapon. 6. It now remains to be seen whether the prosecution succeeded in establishing that the appellant had any hand in the murder of the three victims. As already indicated, there are no eye witnesses of the murder. The evidence against the appellant consists of the following two important circumstances :- 7. A. As already mentioned, when S.I. Virendra Pal Singh (P.W. 18) reached the scene of occurrence on September 19, 1964, he found the mirrors (Exs. 2 and 3) among the various articles lying scattered in the Kotha. He noticed that the two mirrors bore some finger prints; Realising that they might afford valuable clue regarding the identity of the assailants, he carefully packed them in two separate containers and sealed them at the spot. The specimen finger and thumb impressions (Ex. Ka. 16) of the appellant were taken by Shri H.C. Kamthan (P. W. 10), S. D. M., Datia (M.P.) on October 6, 1964. The two sets of finger impressions, i.e. the specimen finger and thumb impressions of the appellant taken before the S.D.M. Datia as well as the finger impressions found on the two mirrors (Exhibits 2 and 3) were in due course, examined by P.W. 12, Sukhbir Singh, Incharge Field Unit Finger Print Expert, Scientific Section, C.I.D. U.P., Lucknow. He applied finger print powder on the two mirrors with the help of a brush and thereby made the latent impressions fully .visible. He then got enlarged photographs taken of the specimen finger impressions as also of the impressions existing on the mirrors (Exhibits 2 and 3). As a result of careful examination, he came to the conclusion that the two sets of impressions were of the right thumb of the; same person. In his statement at the trial, Sri Sukhbir Singh enumerated seven points of similarity. No marks: of dissimilarity were noticed by him. As a result of careful examination, he came to the conclusion that the two sets of impressions were of the right thumb of the; same person. In his statement at the trial, Sri Sukhbir Singh enumerated seven points of similarity. No marks: of dissimilarity were noticed by him. In his opinion, the data was sufficient to come to a positive conclusion that the two sets of impressions were of the right thumb of one and the same person (vide his report Exhibit Ka. 30). 8. As already indicated, the appellants contention at the trial was that the two mirrors (Exhibits 2 and 3) did not bear his finger impressions. It is significant that no allegation was made by the appellant at any stage that his finger impressions were obtained on the mirrors by coercion, threats or persuasion by any agency. 9. In view of the importance of the evidence of the Finger Print Expert, we deemed it necessary to obtain the opinion of another expert on this matter. Accordingly, we got the two sets of impressions examined by Sri M.M. Sen Gupta, Handwriting Expert of Allahabad. His statement was recorded in Court yesterday. Sri Sen Gupta stated that he has been practising as a document and finger-print expert since 1936, having received training in this Science under the late Charles Hardless Senior as well as also under other institution. In the opinion of Sri Sen Gupta also, the thumb impressions on the mirrors (Exhibits 2 and 3) are identical with the specimen thumb impressions of the appellant taken before the magistrate. In coming to that conclusion, Sri Sen Gupta gave the following grounds:- 10. The two sets of thumb impressions were of the same whoral type. They also tallied with each other in respect of ridge cantours as well as in the combination of ridge characteristics, there being seven points of similarity. In addition, a few other points were mentioned by Sri Sen Gupta. 11. According to Sri Sen Gupta, a minimum number of six ridge characteristics in combination and in the constellation is sufficient to establish the identity of the person conclusively and if there are more than six such characteristics it affords further assurance of the identity of the maker of the impressions. 11. According to Sri Sen Gupta, a minimum number of six ridge characteristics in combination and in the constellation is sufficient to establish the identity of the person conclusively and if there are more than six such characteristics it affords further assurance of the identity of the maker of the impressions. He asserted that there could not be similar combination and identical constellation of six or more than six ridge characteristics in the thumb or finger prints of two individuals; this would not be found even between the two thumb or finger impressions of the one and the same person. 12. We have also examined the two sets of finger impressions with the help of a magnifying glass. We see no reason to differ from the concurrent findings of Sri Sukhbir Singh (P.W. 12). Finger Print Expert of the Scientific Section, C.I.D. U.P., Lucknow and of Sri M.M. Sen Gupta, a non official hand-writing expert of Allahabad who is not connected with this case, and as such can be safely relied upon to give independent evidence. At the risk of repetition, we may point out that the appellant nowhere alleged that his thumb impressions were obtained on the mirrors (Exhibits 2 and 3) by the police or other agency by coercion, inducement or misrepresentation. His case was that the mirrors did not bear his thumb impressions. In this connection; it would be pertinent to point out that the two mirrors were taken by S.O. Chirgaon, Virendra Pal Singh (P.W. 18) into his possession as early as September 19, 1964 (vide recovery memo, exhibit Ka. 14), which clearly mentions that the two mirrors bore finger impressions. On that date the appellant was nowhere in the picture. He was arrested only on September 27, 1964, i.e. eight days after. Therefore, on September 19, 1964, S.I. Virendra Pal Singh would not have possibly foreseen the arrest of the appellant or that the thumb impressions noticed on the two mirrors would eventually tally with those of the appellant. 13. The learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to show why, under these circumstances, the evidence of the two finger print experts on the two mirrors should be discarded. The science of finger-print impressions is an exact one. It is well known that the finger impressions of no two persons in the world tally with each other. 13. The learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to show why, under these circumstances, the evidence of the two finger print experts on the two mirrors should be discarded. The science of finger-print impressions is an exact one. It is well known that the finger impressions of no two persons in the world tally with each other. In the present case, at the risk of repetition, there were more than six points of similarity between the two sets of impressions. Therefore, the conclusion is irresistible that the thumb impressions found by S.I. Virendra Pal Singh (P.W.) on Sept. 19, 1964 on the two mirrors (Exhibits 2 and 3), which were found lying among the scattered articles at the scene of occurrence, were those of the appellant and nobody else. As a necessary corollary it follows that although the appellant has denied all the allegations levelled against him by the prosecution, it is established that he was present in the house of the victims at the time the murders were committed; bearing in mind that three grown up persons were crually murdered, their necks having been cut by heavy sharp cutting instruments, it can be safely inferred that the number of assailants must have been more than one. B. There is the testimony of S.I. Jai Singh (P.W. 3), S.O. Bhander (M.P.) that on September 23, 1964 he had visited P.S. Chirgaon in district Jhansi in connection with a crime that had been committed within his jurisdiction. While at Chirgaon, the S.O. of that police station, had requested him (S.I. Jai Singh) to be on the look out for the appellant and to arrest him. On September 27, 1964, S.I. Jai Singh received information through an informer that the appellant was present at the house of his maternal uncle in village Ajitpura. Some informers were accordingly deputed to village Ajitpura to tackle the appellant and to bring him to the Thana. At about 8 p.m. one of the informers brought the appellant to P.S. Bhander. At that time Meharban Singh Sarpanch, Kendra Panchayat, Bhander (P.W. 6) and Ram Charan Patel of Pipraua Khurd (P.W. 4) were present at the Thana. On being interrogated, the appellant handed over a pair of gold Balis (Ex. 1) to the S.I. after taking them out from his pocket. At that time Meharban Singh Sarpanch, Kendra Panchayat, Bhander (P.W. 6) and Ram Charan Patel of Pipraua Khurd (P.W. 4) were present at the Thana. On being interrogated, the appellant handed over a pair of gold Balis (Ex. 1) to the S.I. after taking them out from his pocket. S.I. Jai Singh received the Balis and packed and sealed them (vide memo Exhibit Ka. 5). Information of the arrest of the appellant was sent to P.S. Chirgaon. The Balis were deposited in the Malkhana. The Balis were in due course transferred to the Malkhana at Jhansi. They were put up for identification in the presence of Sri K. C. Pippal (P.W. 13), Magistrate 1st Class, Jhansi on November 18, 1964. Necessary precautions were taken by that magistrate to ensure a fair identification. The Balis were correctly identified by Smt. Gyan Devi (P.W. 1) and Smt. Sharda (P.W. 2), daughters of Rameshwar Prasad, without making any mistake (vide Exhibit Ka. 31). It would be remembered that the appellant all along, denied having produced the Balis to the police at Bhander. In view of the positive testimony of not only S.I. Jai Singh but of the two recovery witnesses Meharban Singh Sarpanch and Ram Charan Patel, both of whom appear to be respectable witnesses, there can be no doubt that the Balis were in fact recovered from the possession of the appellant. It is also clear that these Balis belonged to the family of Rameshwar Prasad, the male victim in this case, having been identified by both his daughters. It is also noteworthy that in the First Information Report (Ex. Ka. 36), which was lodged at 8.30 p.m. at P.S. Chirgaon on September 19, 1964, there is a mention that the Balis were found missing from the person of Smt. Avadh Kunwar. The recovery of the same Balis from the possession of the appellant some days later is another important circumstance which connects him with the commission of the offence. 14. No defence was adduced by the appellant and his allegation that on the day of occurrence he was present in village Pahargaon, Police Station Konch, remains in the air. 15. On an anxious consideration of the entire evidence on the record, our conclusion is that the two pieces of evidence discussed earlier, do establish the presence of the appellant at the scene of murders. 15. On an anxious consideration of the entire evidence on the record, our conclusion is that the two pieces of evidence discussed earlier, do establish the presence of the appellant at the scene of murders. At the risk of the fact that three grown up adult persons were mercilessly hacked to death, in all probability, the number of assailants must have been more than one. It was not possible for the appellant single-handed to commit three murders and escape. In our opinion, therefore, the appellant was rightly convicted of three offences under Section 302/134 I.P.C. 16. There remains the question of sentence to be imposed upon him for those offences. As already pointed out, the offence appears to have been committed by more than one assailant. From the evidence on the record, it cannot be said definitely what was the exact role played by the appellant. The learned counsel for the appellant further pointed out that the appellant is only about 20 years of age. It is, therefore, possible that he had accompanied some older persons who cut the necks of the three unfortunate victims. In view of these circumstances, we consider that the ends of justice would be served if the appellant, instead of being visited with the extreme penalty prescribed by the law, is sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for each of the three offences. The further conviction of the appellant under Section 380 I.P.C. on the charge of having stolen the gold Balis from the person of Smt. Avadh Kunwar and the sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment inflicted upon him thereunder by the trial court calls for no interference. 17. The result is that the appeal is allowed in part. The conviction of the appellant, Ram Narain, of three offences under Section 302/34 I.P.C. is maintained, but the sentence of death inflicted upon him thereunder is set aside. Instead, he is sentenced to undergo life imprisonment for each of the three offences under Section 302 34 I.P.C. His conviction under Section 380 I.P.C. is also maintained along with the sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment inflicted on him thereunder by the trial Court. All the sentences will run concurrently. The appellant, who is in jail, will undergo the sentences inflicted upon him according to law. 18. The reference made by the Sessions Judge under Section 374 Cr. P. C. is accordingly, rejected.