JUDGMENT B.N. Katju, J. - Latta Prasad, Maya Ram and Munna have filed this appeal against the judgment of II Additional Sessions Judge. Mainpuri dated February 12, 1977 passed in Sessions Trial No. A-63 of 1976 convicting them under Sections 302/34, 324/34 and 323/34 I.P.C. and sentencing them to life imprisonment, one year's rigorous imprisonment and six months rigorous imprisonment respectively. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Maya Ram and Munna Lal appellants are the sons of Bhagwan Das. Lalta Prasad appellant is the son of Shiv Prasad co-accused the brother of Bhagwan Das. All the appellants are residents of village Sankhini. Imtiyaz Ali (P.W. 1) is also a resident of village Sahkhini. Ilahi Bux deceased was his father and he resided with him. Faquir Mohammad (P.W. 2) and Jan Mohammad (P.W. 4) are also residents of village Sankhini. 3. The case of the prosecution is that prior to the occurrence Pritam Singh resident of Dwarikapur had filed a criminal complaint against Shiv Prasad co-accused, Maya Ram appellant and others in Agra. The case instituted on the basis of the said complaint w,as committed to the Court of Sessions. But Maya Ram appellant and Shiv Prasad co-accused did not appear in Court as a result of which their property was attached about two and half years earlier. llahi Bux deceased appeared as a witness in that case on behalf of the prosecution. On August 24, 1975 at about 4 P.M. while I1ahi Bux deceased and Imtiyaz Ali (P . W. 1) were returning to their village from Usra Ki Garhi after having sold bangles and were resting in the Thar of Kadam Singh under a mango tree, Maya Ram appellant armed with a Farsa, Lalta Prasad and Munna Lal appellants armed with Lathis and Shiv Prasad co-accused I armed with ballam came there and on the instigation of Shiv Prasad co-accused Maya Ram appellant gave a Farsa blow on the head of the deceased as a result of which he fell down. Maya Ram appellant thereafter gave another Farsa blow on the head of the deceased. The appellants then assaulted Imtiyaz Ali (P.W. 1) with the weapons with which they were armed. The appellants and Shiv Prasad co-accused thereafter ran away. 4. Maya Ram appellant thereafter gave another Farsa blow on the head of the deceased. The appellants then assaulted Imtiyaz Ali (P.W. 1) with the weapons with which they were armed. The appellants and Shiv Prasad co-accused thereafter ran away. 4. The first information report was lodged by Imtiyaz Ali (P.W. 1) at Police Station Khairgarm at 8.30 P.M. on the same day (August 24, 1975), the distance of the Police Station from the place of occurrence being five miles. 5. Ilahi Buy deceased died at about 2.45 A. M. on August 25, 1975 at Shikohabad while he was being taken to the hospital from the Police Station. 6. The injuries of Imtiyaz All (P.W. 1) were examined by Dr. M.L. Agrawal (P. W. 6) on August 25 1975 at 3 A. M. and the undermentioned injuries were found on his person: 1. Lacerated wound 314" x 1110" x scalp deep on front of head near hairy margin of head and forehead in middle, clotted blood present. 2. Lacerated wound 2-112" x 1110" x scalp deep on left side head 3-112" above left ear, clotted blood present. 3. Lacerated wound 2" x 1110" x scalp deep on left side head 2" behind injury No. 2 directed of both side to side. Clotted blood present. 4. Lacerated wound 314" x 1110" x scalp deep on left side head, clotted blood present, anterio posterior, 1" in front of injury No. 2. 5. Lacerated wound 2" x 118" x scalp, deep on back of head in middle 3" above neck, oblique clotted blood present. 6. Traumatic swelling red on whole of left knee joint with an abrasion " x " soft scale formed in middle of it. 7. Traumatic swelling red on whole of right knee joint with an abrasion ?" x " soft scale formed on inner side of swelling. 8. Traumatic swelling on front surface of left hand red. 9. Incised wound 314" x " gaping x 116" deep margins swollen on Palmer surface of middle of left middle finger transverse, clotted blood present. 10. Contusion 2" x 1" red on outer side of left elbow joint. 11. Multiple contusion (about thirteen) varying in size from 3" x 1" to 5" x 1"-red scattered on whole of back, some crossing each other, some overlapping. The postmortem examination was conducted by Dr. H.N. Srivastava (P . 10. Contusion 2" x 1" red on outer side of left elbow joint. 11. Multiple contusion (about thirteen) varying in size from 3" x 1" to 5" x 1"-red scattered on whole of back, some crossing each other, some overlapping. The postmortem examination was conducted by Dr. H.N. Srivastava (P . W. 12) on August 25, 1975 at 1.35 P.M. and the undermentioned antemortem external in. juries were found on the body of the deceased: 1. Incised wound 8 cm x 2 cm x scalp none deep on the right side of scalp, vertical, 6 cm above to mid of right eye brow and 6 cm above to tip of right ear., Margins wall defined sharp. Clotted blood present. 2. Incised wound 6 cm x 1 .5 cm z scalp bone deep just lateral (about 1,5 cm) to injury No 1 and about parallel to above injury. Margins sharp well defined and clotted blood present. 7. On internal examination depressed multiple fracture of right parietal bone and loosening of the sutures was found under injuries Nos. 1 and 2. The membrane was found to be torn and congested and the brain was found to be congested and effused. 8. In the opinion of Dr. Srivastava (P.W. 12) the injuries found on the body of the deceased were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 9. The prosecution examined three eye-witnesses, namely, Imtiyaz Ali (P.W. 1),, Faquir Mohammad (P.W. 2) and Jan Mo hammad (P.W. 3). 10. All the appellants pleaded not guilty and stated that they were implicated falsely due to enmity. 11. The trial Court after considering the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the prosecution had succeeded in establishing the guilt of the appellants and convicted and sentenced them as mentioned earlier. Shiv Prasad co-accused was, however, acquitted. 12. Imtiyaz All (P.W. 1) narrated the prosecution case as mentioned earlier. His evidence is corroborated by the first information report lodged by him without any undue delay and is supported by the medical evidence. His presence at the time of the incident is established by the injuries received by him. Considering the fact that the incident took place in broad day light he was bound to recognise the assailants of the deceased and his assailants. His presence at the time of the incident is established by the injuries received by him. Considering the fact that the incident took place in broad day light he was bound to recognise the assailants of the deceased and his assailants. It is difficult to believe that he would have omitted the real assailants and would have implicated the appellants falsely. It is no doubt true appellants were strained prior to the occurrence but this is not sufficient to reject his testimony. Nothing has been brought on in his cross-examination to shake his credit. In our opinion his evidence is reliable. 13. Faquir Mohammad (P.W. 2) corroborated the evidence of Imtiyaz All (P.W. 1) regarding the incident. It was stated by him that while he was returning from the market at Tape after selling his she-buffalo and had reached near the Thar of Padam Singh on the day of occurrence at about 4 P.M. he saw the incident. He is mentioned as eye witness in the first information report and the explanation given by him for his presence at the time of the incident appears to be convincing. His evidence is also supported by the medical evidence. He appears to be independent as there was no previous enmity between him and the appellants. It is, therefore, difficult to believe that he would have implicated the appellants falsely. It was contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that as Imtiyaz Ali (P . W. 1) had stated in the cross-examination that the other witnesses came near him and the deceased after the appellants had gin away his t presence at the time of the incident cannot be accepted. It was stated by him (Faqiuir Mohammad) that he witnessed the incident from a distance of about fifteen paces. It appears that he went to the place where the deceased and Imtiyaz All (P.W. 1) were assaulted after the appellants had run away. Thus the statement of Imtiyaz All (P. W. 1) that the other witnesses came to the place of occurrence after the appellants had run away cannot lead to the inference that the incident had not been witnessed by Faquir Mohammad (P.W. 2). Nothing has been brought out in his cross-examination to demolish his testimony. In our opinion his evidence is reliable. 14. Jan Mohammad (P.W . 4) also corroborated the evidence of Imtiyaz All (P.W. 1) regarding the incident. Nothing has been brought out in his cross-examination to demolish his testimony. In our opinion his evidence is reliable. 14. Jan Mohammad (P.W . 4) also corroborated the evidence of Imtiyaz All (P.W. 1) regarding the incident. It was stated by him that while he was returning from the Market of Tape to his house and has reached near the Thar of Padam Singh be witnessed the incident. He is also mentioned as an eye witness in the first information report and the explanation given by him for his presence at the time of the incident is convincing. His evidence is also supported by the medical evidence and he is also independent. Nothing has been brought out in his cross-examination to shake his credit. His evidence is also reliable. 15. The evidence of the three eye witnesses, therefore, established that Maya Ram appellant gave two blows on the head of the deceased with his Farsa which resulted in his death. As the injuries inflicted by him caused fractures of the skull bone which was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death he is clearly guilty under Section 302 I.P.C. The trial court thus erred in convicting him under Section 302/34 I.P.C. He is also guilty under Section 324/34 and 323/34 I.P.C. for having caused injuries to Imtiyaz Ali (P.W. 1). 16. The question that remains to be considered is whether Lalta Prasad and Munna Lal appellants can be held guilty under Section 302/34 I.P.C. for the injuries caused to the deceased by Maya Ram appellant. It appears from the evidence of the eye witnesses that the appellants met the deceased while the deceased and Imtiyaz Ali (P.W. 1) were resting under a mango tree in the Thar of Padam Singh which is situated on the village path. It thus appears that that meeting was not a result of any premeditation. but by chance. Maya Ram appellant had enmity with the deceased as he had deposed against him in the case prior to the occurrence. Both the blows were given by Maya Ram appellant to the deceased while Lalta Prasad and Munna Lal appellants did not assault the deceased. In these circumstances the assault on the deceased by Maya Ram appellant appears to be his individual act and was not done by him in furtherance of the common intention of Lalta Prasad and Munna Lal appellants. In these circumstances the assault on the deceased by Maya Ram appellant appears to be his individual act and was not done by him in furtherance of the common intention of Lalta Prasad and Munna Lal appellants. Lalta Prasad and Munna Lal appellants cannot thus be held guilty under Section 302/34 I.P.C. for the assault on the deceased by Maya Ram appellant. They are, however, guilty under Sections 324/34 and 323/34 I.P.C. with respect to the assault on Imtiyaz Ali (P.W. 1). 17. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case the sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment awarded to the appellants under Section 324/34 I.P.C. appears to be excessive. Ends of justice would be met by reducing it to six months rigorous imprisonment awarded to the appellants under Section 323/34 I.P.C. does not appear to be excessive. 'Ibis appeal is accordingly allowed in part. The conviction of Maya Ram appellant under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to him thereunder are set aside and instead he is convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment. His conviction under Section 324/34 I.P.C. is upheld but the sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment awarded to him thereunder is reduced to six months rigorous imprisonment. His conviction under Section 323/34 I.P.C. and the sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment awarded to him thereunder are upheld. The conviction of Lalta Prasad and Munna Lal appellants under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to them thereunder are set aside Their conviction under Section 324/34 I.P.C is upheld but the sentence of one year's rigorous imprisonment awarded to them thereunder is reduced to six months rigorous imprisonment. Their conviction under Section 323/34 I.P.C and the sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment awarded to them thereunder upheld. 18. All the sentences awarded to the appellants shall nun concurrent. 19. All the appellants are on bail. They shall be n into custody forthwith to serve the sentences awarded to them.