Short Note : 1. This appeal by the above flamed appellant jogdiya is against his conviction under sections 302/34 and 366 IPC and the sentences of imprisonment for life and two years' R. I. respectively awarded thereunder by the Additional Sessions Judge, Alirajpur. 2. The defence of the accused in the trial Court was that he was innocent and was falsely implicated. The learned trial Judge, however, found the appellant guilty only for the offences under sections 366 and 302/34 IPC and sentenced him as aforesaid. Held : The question is as to whether the accused shared an intention common with the other two accused for causing the death of the deceased Naharsingh. Admittedly even according to the eye-witness Bhimbai (PW 2) the accused has not himself inflicted any injury on the deceased. According to her firing of the gun was by Juwansingh and the balia blow was given by the other accused The appellant has been found liable only on the ground that the intention with which the death of the deceased was caused by Juwansingh and Lambu was also shared by him and it was in further cause of this common intention with the other two accused caused the death of Naharsingh. Admittedly, there was nothing between the accused Jogdiya and the deceased Naharsingh, which could justify motive on the part of this accused to share any intention common with the other two accused for causing the death of the deceased. Apparently the dispute was between the accused Juwansingh and the deceased on the question of Bhimbai being kept by Naharsingh as his wife. The subsequent events as deposed to by Bhimbai, also show that the main intention on the part of all the four accused was to take Bhimbai by force so that she could be kept by Juwansingh as his wife. There is no evidence that prior to the actual incident resulting in the death of the deceased, all the accused had met together and decided to make a joint assault on the deceased for causing his death. It is not unlikely that finding Naharsingh in the company of his wife only and no other person, Juwansingh himself fired from his gun with the intention of causing the death of Naharsingh. It is not unlikely that finding Naharsingh in the company of his wife only and no other person, Juwansingh himself fired from his gun with the intention of causing the death of Naharsingh. The evidence given by Bhimbai would not, in our opinion, justify a conclusion that the accused also shared the intention common with the accused Juwansingh, for causing the death of Naharsingh. 3. It is in the evidence of Bhimbai that she was abducted from the spot and then taken to couple of villagers and finally left in the company of the accused Juwansingh. For this act, the appellant will be as much liable as the other three accused. Appeal partly allowed.