J. S. VERMA, J. ( 1 ) THE following judgment of the Court was delivered by Malik, J. The appellants except Mehtar have been convicted under sections 148 and 307 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 2 years and 5 years respectively. The appellants except Shobit and Manglu have further been convicted under sections 148 and 302 read with section 149, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R. I. for 2 years and to imprisonment for life respectively. The sentences have been made to run concurrently. ( 2 ) TO state the prosecution story briefly: In all, 17 persons were prosecuted for rioting and for attempting to murder Bisram (P. W. 1) and for having committed murders of Baratu and Pheku. Eight have been convicted as aforesaid for attempting to murder Bisram and for committing murder of Baratu. They have all been acquitted of the charge of murder of Pheku. ( 3 ) IN village Pakaria of Bilaspur District, an idol of Budadeo was installed in a temple near the village tank. The Satnamis and non-Satnamis had collected funds for the worship and the worship was performed by the Hindus and Satnamis jointly. Fifteen or twenty days after this worship, ram (P. W. 1), who is a Gond, had a dream and so he says, he was possessed by Budadco, who seemed displeased by the worship at the hands of Satnamis. Bisnim took a sword, a knife and a lemon, to the temple on Hareli day (a day on which the cultivators worshipped their implements and bullocks), worshipped Budadeo and came to the Satnamipara. He accosted the Satnamis not to worship Budadeo anymore. It was his God, he said, and they were not going to pollute the temple any more. This enraged the Satnamis. It is said, Shivram called upon the Satnamis to beat him. Bisram was attacked with Tabbals, Barchhis and lathis. Baratu and Phaku, who reached in hearing the noise, were also attacked and they lost their lives. ( 4 ) THE defence was of false implication. Shivram said that he was attached by Bisram with his sword. He fell unconscious and he did not know how the Satnamis retaliated. Bisram was attacked with Tabbals, Barchhis and lathis. Baratu and Phaku, who reached in hearing the noise, were also attacked and they lost their lives. ( 4 ) THE defence was of false implication. Shivram said that he was attached by Bisram with his sword. He fell unconscious and he did not know how the Satnamis retaliated. ( 5 ) THE learned counsel for the appellants read to us the entire evidence and argued that Bisram and his companions Atal Gond, Mukundsahu and Baswan had come from Hindupara to Satnamipura. They opened an assault on Shivram. The Satnamis then had acted in the exercise of right of private defence. The whole Mohalla had collected and it was difficult to say who did what in the attack made. The appellants were, very probably, passive spectators or were involved due to enmity. The counsel detention to Bisrams testimony, particularly para 9 of his deposition. Bisram deposed that occasionally he was possessed by Budadeo and when that happened, he in his frenzy would not know what he was doing till the frenzy was over. On Hareli day, when he went to Satnamipara, he was possessed by Budadeo. May be that he initiated the trouble. He had gone with dagger and knife and he attacked Shivram, causing simple injuries. He had left that the Satnamis had polluted his temple and when possessed by Budadeo, no harm could be done to him. He could wield his sword with impunity, he thought. The Satnamis, who felt insulted and humiliated by the abuses he hurled at them in their own Mohalla, and when Shivram \vas attacked, they were bound to retaliate. ( 6 ) THAT appears to be so Bisram was assaulted, it appears, under the circumstances stated above. Nonetheless, they had all exceeded the right of private defence. The injuries on Bisrams person indicate cruel beating. Shivram had received superficial incised wounds where as Bisram was almost left dead with number of injuries. As to identity of person, participating in the assault made on Bisram, the learned Sessions Judge has very carefully read the evidence. He sought necessary corroboration of at least two witnesses and the F. I. Rs. which contained narrations at the earliest opportunity. In our appreciation of the evidence, we come to no different conclusion. As to identity of person, participating in the assault made on Bisram, the learned Sessions Judge has very carefully read the evidence. He sought necessary corroboration of at least two witnesses and the F. I. Rs. which contained narrations at the earliest opportunity. In our appreciation of the evidence, we come to no different conclusion. We are, however, of the opinion that the offence made out would be one under section 308, Indian Penal Code instead of under section 307, Indian Penal Code. Had Bisram died due to the assault, the assailants would have been guilty under section 304, Indian Penal Code for having exceeded the right of private defence. For the offences under sections 148, 308/149 Indian Penal Code, the appellants except Mehtar are sentenced to period already undergone (which is about 14 months ). Their convictions and sentences are accordingly modified. ( 7 ) COMING to the offence in respect of Baratu: Baratu had only two incised wounds on his body, one from the left mendible angle to the back of the right ear 12 X 2 X bone deep and the second on the middle of the neck left side. The death was due to shock and haemorrhage produced by these incised wounds. Obviously, the injuries were caused by not more than two persons. ( 8 ) REFERRING to evidence, P. W. 10 Konda Gond tells us that Baratu and Pheku were seen going towards Satnamipara on hearing the noise of marpit, which was then in progress. The Satnamis were then beating Bisram. Konda tells us that they were empty handed. Basawan (P. W. 4) also tells us that he had met Baratu and Pheku on way when he was going home after witnessing Bisram being beaten by the Satnamis. Konda and Basawan did not see assault on Baratu or Pheku. They had seen assault being made on Bisram. P. W. 2 Chandu is the only witness who saw Shivram, Ramkunwar, Nandoba, Mehtar, Sillu, Kunjram surrounding Raratu. Shivram, he says, gave a Tabbal blow on Baratus neck, which made him fall. Kunjram inflicted the second blow on his back with a Pharsa. There is no reason why Chandu should not he believed. He had immediately gone to Lekhram (P. W. 11) to inform him that Baratu had been killed by the Satnamis. His father Faguwa had also seen the incident but unfortunately he is now dead. Kunjram inflicted the second blow on his back with a Pharsa. There is no reason why Chandu should not he believed. He had immediately gone to Lekhram (P. W. 11) to inform him that Baratu had been killed by the Satnamis. His father Faguwa had also seen the incident but unfortunately he is now dead. He also went informing people how his son Baratu has been killed by the Satnamis. Chandus evidence finds corroboration in the F. I. R. lodged by him. Shivrams and Kunjrams implication in the crime of murder is certainly made out. The others did not use their weapons and all that Chandu says, is that they were seen near Baratu when the assault was opened. We propose to give benefit of doubt to them. ( 9 ) IN the result, we set aside the convictions and sentences awarded for murder of Baratu on ramhan, Kunwar, Sillu and Mehtar. They are acquitted of the charges. The appeal, insofar as shivram and Kunjram are concerned is dismissed. They stand convicted under sections 302/34, indian Penal Code and their sentences to imprisonment for life are maintained. Shivram and kunjram alone shall surrender to bail to undergo the remaining sentence. Order accordingly. .