S.S. BYAS, J.— These two appeals by five appellants are directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Merta dated July 30, 1979 convicting and sentencing them as under:- S. No. Name of Accused Offence U/S Sentence Awarded 1. Jai Ram 302/149, IPC Imprisonment for life 147. IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. 447, IPC Three months rigorous imprisonment. 323, IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. 379, IPC One years rigorous imprisonment. 2. Smt. Premli 302/149, IPC Imprisonment for life. 147, IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. 447, IPC Three months rigorous imprisonment. 323, IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. 379, IPC One years rigorous imprisonment. 3. Bharta Ram 302/149, IPC Imprisonment for life. 147, IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. 447, IPC Three months rigorous imprisonment. 323, IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. 379, IPC One years rigorous imprisonment. 4. Khinya Ram 302/149, IPC Imprisonment for life. 147, IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. 447, IPC Three months rigorous imprisonment. 325, IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. 379, IPC One years rigorous imprisonment. 5. Ugma 302/149, IPC imprisonment for life. 147, IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. 447, IPC Three months rigorous imprisonment. 323, IPC Six months rigorous imprisonment. Since both these appeals arise out of one and the same judgment, they were heard together and are disposed of by a common judgment. 2. Briefly stated, the facts and circumstances leading to the prosecution and conviction of the appellants are as under. There are two deceased-victims and a number of injured persons in the case. The deceased-victims are Baksa-Ram and his son Surja Ram. 3. PW 6 Hardeen is the son. PW 9 Mst. Sohini is the daughter, PW 7 Mst. Maluri is the widow of the deceased victim Baksaram while PW 8 Mst. Kamla is the widow of the other deceased-victim Surjaram. They were living together in their Dhani situate in their field in Mauja Rol Chandawata Tehsil Merta District Nagaur. There were strained relations between the appellant Jairam and the deceased-victim Baksaram. Appellant Jairam had filed a suit against Baksaram which was pending at the relevant times when the incident took place. The appellants are also residents of the same village Rol Chandawata. At dawn-break on June 23, 1978 the deceased-victim Surjaram was ploughing his field situate continuous to the Dhani. The appellants accompanied with three more persons namely Khinyaram, Ramsukh and Hemaram came there where Surjaram was working. The appellants are also residents of the same village Rol Chandawata. At dawn-break on June 23, 1978 the deceased-victim Surjaram was ploughing his field situate continuous to the Dhani. The appellants accompanied with three more persons namely Khinyaram, Ramsukh and Hemaram came there where Surjaram was working. They were armed with lathies and other lethal weapons. They made an attack on Surjaram. Surjaram ran towards his Dhani and raised cries. Hearing his cries his father Baksaram (deceased-victim) his mother Smt, Maluri (PW 7,) his brother Hardeen (PW 6), his wife Smt. Kamla (PW8), his sister Mst. Sohini (PW9) came out. The appellants and their companions started landing blows with their weapons to Surjaram. Surjaram fell down. Baksaram tried to intervene and he too was not spared. Surjaram and Baksaram were given severe beatings, as a result of which they fell down and passed away instantaneously on the spot. Hardeen, Smt. Maluri, Smt. Kamla and Mst. Sohini were also not spared and they too were beaten. There was no adult male member in the family except the two deceased-victims. PW 6 Hardeen was a boy of 10-11 years at the time of the incident. It is alleged that the culprits, while leaving the place of occurrence, forcibly took away a gold chain, a gold Bor and the gold Loongs of the injured victims. The news of the murders spread in the village. PW 15 Hanumansingh went to Police Station, Merta Road and reported that as per rumour in the village, Baksaram and Surjaram were murdered. The information was recorded in "Rojnamcha" of the Police Station. It is Ex. p. 45. Since the information was vague and disclosed nothing material, PW 16 Shaitansingh Head Constable Police immediately left for the spot. He there found the victims deadbodies lying in the field outside the Dhani. He also found Mst. Sohini and other injured victims sitting there. He recorded the statement of Mst. Sohini which is Ex. P. 40. Mst. Sohini in her statement Ex. p. 40, narrated the whole incident, Ex P. 40 was treated as the FIR and a case was registered thereon The investigation was taken up by the Deputy Superintendent of Police Shri Baktawarsingh (PW 17). He immediately arrived on the spot and prepared the inquest reports of the deadbodies. He also inspected the site and prepared the site plan Ex p. 2. He immediately arrived on the spot and prepared the inquest reports of the deadbodies. He also inspected the site and prepared the site plan Ex p. 2. He seized and sealed the blood-smeared soil from the place of occurrence. The blood-stained clothes of the deceased-victims were seized and sealed. The post-mortem examination of the victims deadbodies was conducted by PW 5 Dr. Tulsaram, the then Medical Officer In-charge, Government Hospital, Merta Road. He noticed the following injuries on the deadbody of Baksaram:- 1) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x 1/2" x bone deep on the left parietal region of head. 2) Lacerated wound 1/4" x 1/2" x muscle deep on the lateral and lower part of left arm, with haematoma. 3) Bruise 3" x 2" on the front and upper part of the left arm. 4) Lacerated wound 3/4" x 1/2" x muscle deep on the front and lower part of right arm. 5) Lacerated wound 2" x 1-1/2" x bone deep on the lateral aspect of right arm with huge haematoma. 6) Bruise with swelling 3" x 2" on the dorsal aspect of right hand causing fracture of underlined 3rd and 4th metacarpal bones. 7) Bruise 3-1/2" x 2" on the postero-medial aspect of middle part of right fore-arm. 8) Bruise on the front and middle part of the left thigh 9) Cylinderical bruise on the left side of abdomen 9" x 1-1/2". 10) Bruise 4-1/2" x 1-1/2" on the right side of chest on middle part. 11) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x 1/3" skin deep on the lateral and middle part of left leg causing fracture fibula. 12) Bruise with haematoma on the lateral and lower part of right leg 3" x 2" causing the fracture of right fibula. 13) Multiple clyinderical bruises scattered irregularly and intermangling each other on the left side of back extending from scapular to lumber region. Their length varying 3" to 9" and width 1-1/2" and about 7 in number. The underlined 6th to loth ribs were fractured near the angles. 14) Four cylinderical bruises on the right of back over infra-scapular region inter mangling each other causing fracture of 7th to 9th ribs. Their lengths varying from 3" to 5-1/2" and width 1-1/2" of each. INTERNAL 1) There was fracture of 3rd and 4th right metacarpel bones under injury No. 6. 2) The fracture of left fibula bone under injury No. 11. Their lengths varying from 3" to 5-1/2" and width 1-1/2" of each. INTERNAL 1) There was fracture of 3rd and 4th right metacarpel bones under injury No. 6. 2) The fracture of left fibula bone under injury No. 11. 3) Fracture of left 6th to 10th ribs under injuries No. 13, causing laceration consequent extensive homo-thorax from the ruptured left lung, middle and lower lobe. 4) Fracture of right 7th to 9th ribs under injury No. 14 causing laceration lower lobe of right lung and consequent haemotherax. In his opinion the cause of death of Baksaram was sudden shack and syncope due to extensive bilateral haema-therax in both therasic cavities on account of multiple fractures of both sided ribs leading to rupture of lung substance and thereafter asphyxia and death. The injuries No. 13 and 14 were individually found sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death. The post mortem report issued by him is Ex. p. 34. 4. The doctor noticed the following injuries on the body of Surjaram:- 1) Lacerated wound 2" x 1/2 x bone deep on the left occipital region of head with clotted blood over it. 2) Lacerated wound l-1/2"x 1/2"x bone deep on the right front-partial region of head. There was depressed fracture of right parietal bone at its junction with frontal bone under this injury. 3) Lacerated wound 2" x 1/2" x bone deep on the right occipital region of head. 4) Two, cylinderical bruise on the postero-occipital aspect of middle and lower part of right arm each about 3" x 2". 5) Two bruises on the poster-medial aspect of right forearm on middle part each about 2-1/3" x 1-1/2". 6) Two bruises on the lateral aspect of middle part of left arm 2-1/2" x 1-1/2" each. 7) Lacerated wound 2" x 1/2" x bone deep on the postero-lateral aspect of left elbow. 8) Three bruises scattered on the posterior part of middle part of left forearm. 9) Four lacerated wounds on the front of left leg from upper to middle and lower each about 3/4" x 1/3" muscle deep. 10) Bruise 2-1/2" x 2" on the lateral and lower part of left leg causing fracture of fibula bone. 11) Five lacerated wounds on the front of right leg from upper to lower part each about 3/4" x 1 /3". 10) Bruise 2-1/2" x 2" on the lateral and lower part of left leg causing fracture of fibula bone. 11) Five lacerated wounds on the front of right leg from upper to lower part each about 3/4" x 1 /3". 12) Multiple about 6 to 7 cylinderical bruises intermingling each other and scattered on the both sides of back from scapular to lumber area. 13) Multiple cylinderical bruises on the both buttocks. INTERNAL 1) Fracture of right parietal bone under injury No. 2 causing subarachaoid haemorrhage and haemotoma leading to compression of brain substance. 2) Fracture of left fibula bone under injury No. 10 The injuries were antemartem. In the opinion of Dr. Tulsaram, the cause of death of Surjaram was shock and come due to intracranial haemorrhage leading to compression of brain substance. Injury No. 2 was found sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death, The post martem report issued by him is EX. P. 33. 5. Dr. Tulsaram also examined the four injured victims and found the following injuries:- On the person of Smt. Maluri 1) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x 1/3" bone deep on the right frontal region of head with clotted blood over it. 2) Reddish bruise with abrasion on the postero-lateral aspect of left forearm on middle part 3" x 2". 3) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x 1/2"x muscle deep on the lateral aspect of lower part of right arm. 4) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x 1/3" bone deep on the back and upper part of right forearm with clotted blood over it. 5) Reddish bruise 2-1/2" x 2" on the posteromedial aspect of right forearm middle part. 6) Six cylinderical reddish bruises irregularly scattered on the right infra-scapular and lower part of back of varying length intermangling each other. 7) Reddish cylinderical bruise on the left scapular region of back 4-1/3" x 1-1/4. 8) Bruise (reddish) on the left side back over lumber region 4 -1/4" x 1-1/2". 9) Three elongated reddish bruises scattered on the left buttock of varying lengths and inter-mangling each other. 10) Two cylinderical bruise each about 3-1/2" x 1-1/2" on the right buttock. 11) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x l/2"x bone deep on the front and upper part of left leg with clotted blood over it. 12) Reddish bruise 3-1/2" x 1-1/3" on the lateral aspect of right leg over middle part with tender swelling. 10) Two cylinderical bruise each about 3-1/2" x 1-1/2" on the right buttock. 11) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x l/2"x bone deep on the front and upper part of left leg with clotted blood over it. 12) Reddish bruise 3-1/2" x 1-1/3" on the lateral aspect of right leg over middle part with tender swelling. On the person of Smt. Kamla 1) Lacerated wound 2-1/2" x 1/3" x bone deep on the right front parietal region of head with clotted blood over it. Wound was stitched by me. 2) Reddish bruise with laceration of skin on the front and middle part of left leg 2-1/2" x 2" with tender swelling. 3) Reddish bruise with tender swelling on the dorsum of left foot 2-1/2" x2-1/2". 4) Reddish bruise 2-1/2" x 2-1/3" on the left lower thigh on the postere-medial aspect. 5) Lacerated wound 1" x 1/3" x bone deep on the front and middle part of right leg with swellinga round it. 6) Abradded area of skin 1-1/4" x 1/2" on the front of right knee. 7) Reddish bruise 2-1/2"x 1-1/4" on the back and middle part of fore-arm. 8) Lacerated wound l"xl/5" muscle deep on the back of right fore-arm. 9) Lacerated wound 1" x 1/3" on the back and upper part of right forearm, having bone depth. 10) Reddish bruise with tender swelling on the dorsum of right hand 3-1/4" x 2". 11) Reddish bruise with tender swelling on the back of right arm on lower part 3" x \y. 12) Reddish bruise 5-1/2" x 1-1/2" on the right scapular region. 13) Two reddish cylinderical bruise on the left scapular region each about 7-1/2" x 1-1/2" transversely oblique. On the person of Smt. Sohini 1) Lacerated wound 2-1/2" x 1/3" muscle deep on the left frontal region of just 1/2" lateral to mid-segital line with clotted blood over it. 2) Reddish bruise with tender swelling on the dorsum of right hand 4" x 2". 3) Reddish bruise 3" x 1-1/2" x on the back and middle part of right fore-arm. 4) Reddish bruise 2-1/2" x 2" on the lateral aspect of left elbow. 5) Reddish bruise 4" x 1-1/2" on the right shoulder. 6) Lacerated wound on the front and middle part of right leg 1-1/4 " x 1/5" x muscle deep. 7) Lacerated wound 1" x 1/3" on the front and upper part of left leg. 4) Reddish bruise 2-1/2" x 2" on the lateral aspect of left elbow. 5) Reddish bruise 4" x 1-1/2" on the right shoulder. 6) Lacerated wound on the front and middle part of right leg 1-1/4 " x 1/5" x muscle deep. 7) Lacerated wound 1" x 1/3" on the front and upper part of left leg. 8) Two cylinderical bruises on the postero-lateral aspect of right thigh on upper part each about 4-1/2" x 1-1/2". 9) Reddish bruise on the lateral aspect of lower part of left leg 2-1/2" x 1-1/2. 10) Two cylinderical bruises on the scapular and infra-scapular region of back on left side each about 5" x 1-1/2". 11) Three cylinderical reddish bruises scattered irregularly on the right scapular infra-scapular and lunber area of back intermangling each other. On the person of Hardeen- 1) Reddish bruise with abrasion of skin over it with tender swelling measuring 3-1/2" x 2" on dorsum of right fact on middle part. 2) Reddish bruise with abrasion of skin over it on the front and middle part of left leg with tender swelling around it 2-1/2" x 2". 3) Reddish bruise with tender swelling on the lateral aspect of lower part of left leg 5" x 2". 4) Reddish bruise with tender swelling on the dorsum of the left hand measuring 4" x 2". 6. The injuries of all these four injured victims were found simple caused by blunt object. The injury reports are EX. P. 35. P. 37, P. 38 and P. 39. The appellants and their associates were arrested and in consequence of the disclosure statements made by them lathies, knife and the stolen gold ornaments were recovered. The clothes of some of them, were also found stained with blood. These clothes were seized and sealed. The blood stained articles were sent for chemical examination and human blood was detected on most of them. On the completion of investigation the police presented a challan against the appellants and their companions Bhinyaram, Ramsukh and Hemaram, in the Court of the Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Merta, who in his turn committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges under sections 147. 302/149, 307/149, 394. 447 and 323/149, I.P.C. against all of them, to which they pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges under sections 147. 302/149, 307/149, 394. 447 and 323/149, I.P.C. against all of them, to which they pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. Appellant Bharta Ram admitted his presence on the spot but denied that he landed blows to any of the victims. The stand taken by them was that of peaceful by-stander. The remaining seven accused denied their presence on the spot and stated that they were falsely implicated due to their enmity with the complainant party. In support of its case the prosecution examined 19 witnesses and filed some documents In defence the accused examined one witness. On the conclusion of trial the learned Sessions Judge found no incriminating material against Bhinyaram, Ramsukh and Hemaram. They were consequently acquitted of the offences they were charged with. The prosecution case was taken substantially true and proved against the five appellants. They were, therefore, convicted and sentenced as mentioned at the very out-set. Aggrieved against their conviction and sentence, the 5 appellants have come up in appeal. 7. We have heard Mr. M. R. Bhansali and Shri M. M. Singhvi. learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor Shri Niyazuddin Khan for the State. We have also gone through the case file carefully. 8. Before proceeding further, we may point out that the cause of death of the two victims Baksaram and Surjaram was not challenged before us by the learned counsel. So also the number and nature of injures sustained by the four surviving injured victims. Smt. Sohini, Smt. Kamla, Smt. Maluri and Hardeen were also not challenged before us. We have also carefully gone through the testimony of PW 5 Dr. Tulsaram and find no good and cogent reasons to distrust bis opinion about the cause of death of the victims and the number and nature of injuries sustained by the aforesaid four surviving persons. It, therefore, stands established that the death of Baksaram and Surjaram was homicidal. The aforesaid surviving victims sustained multiple injuries in the occurrence. 9. The prosecution has examined four eye witnesses of the occurrence, namely PW 6 Hardeen, PW 7 Smt. Maluri, PW 8 Smt. Kamla and PW 9 Smt. Sohini. These four witnesses are also injured persons who received injuries in the very incident. The aforesaid surviving victims sustained multiple injuries in the occurrence. 9. The prosecution has examined four eye witnesses of the occurrence, namely PW 6 Hardeen, PW 7 Smt. Maluri, PW 8 Smt. Kamla and PW 9 Smt. Sohini. These four witnesses are also injured persons who received injuries in the very incident. As stated at the very out-set they are the close relatives being the son, widows and daughter of the two deceased victims. The learned Sessions Judge has accepted their testimony as true and reliable against the five appellants and convicted them thereon. 10. In assailing the conviction, the learned counsel vehemently contended in the first place that the testimony of these four witnesses is wholly insufficient and unreliable. The learned Sessions Judge found them unreliable as against the three acquitted accused persons. As such when they were found partly unreliable, it would not be safe to accept the residue of their testimony as against the appellants. It was urged that at any rate it would not be safe to maintain the conviction of the appellants, on the basis of the testimony of these four witnesses when their evidence as against the three acquitted accused has not been accepted as true. It was also urged that the Court below took it a case of over-implication as against the three acquitted accused. As such the possibility of the false implication of the appellants cannot be ruled out. It was also argued that the version of landing the blows given in the F. I. R. EX. P. 40 was given-up and improvements were made during trial. This improvement has damaged the prosecution case beyond repair. The manner of beatings has been changed by these four witnesses. That makes the prosecution case highly doubtful and the benefit of doubt should be extended to the appellants. 11. In reply, the learned Public Prosecutor supported the findings of the trial court and submitted that the entire evidence was thoroughly scanned, scrutinized and shifted by the learned Sessions Judge. Since the corroborative evidence was lacking as against the three acquitted accused persons, benefit of doubt was extended to them. It was urged that the acquitted of the three accused should not be taken to be the ground for dismissing the testimony of the four eye witnesses in toto. The testimony of a witness can be relied upon in part. Since the corroborative evidence was lacking as against the three acquitted accused persons, benefit of doubt was extended to them. It was urged that the acquitted of the three accused should not be taken to be the ground for dismissing the testimony of the four eye witnesses in toto. The testimony of a witness can be relied upon in part. The presence of the eye witnesses on the spot is not open to any doubt in asmuch as they themselves were severely beaten by the appellants. Since their presence on the spot is beyond doubt, it cannot be expected from them that they would leave the real murderers and substitute the innocent persons in their place. We have taken the respective submissions into consideration. 12. It would be proper to read the evidence of the four eye witnesses in order to dispose of the various contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellants. PW 6 Hardeen aged about 11 years, on a preliminary examination, was found competent to testify. He was also found as to understand the sanctity of oath and as such oath was administered to him. He deposed that at dawn - break on the day of occurrence he get up on hearing the noise and went outside the Dhani in the field. He saw accused Khinya Ram, Bhinyaram, Ramsukh and Jairam striking blows to his father Baksaram with lathies. Accused Bharta Ram, Ugmaram, Hemaram and Premli were striking blows with lathies to his brother Surjaram. His sister Mst. Sohini (PW 9), his mother Smt. Maluri (PW 7) and his Bhabhi Mst. Kamla (PW 8) tried to intervene and they too were not spared. The miscreants struck blows also to these ladies. When he tried to intervene, he was also beaten by accused Ugmaram, Bhartaram and Hema Ram. He got frightened and took shelter in his Dhani After sometime he came out again and found his father Baksaram dead. Surjaram passed away in the noon. The same narration of the incident was given by PW 7 Smt. Maluri. According to her, also, the appellants accompanied by three more persons (acquitted accused) came there in her field wherein is situate her Dhani. The accused Bhartaram, Ugmaram, Hemaram and Mst. Premli struck blows to Surjaram with their lathies while accused Jairam, Ramsukh, Khinyaram and Bhinyaram struck blows to Baksaram with their lathies. When Mst. Kamla, Mst. According to her, also, the appellants accompanied by three more persons (acquitted accused) came there in her field wherein is situate her Dhani. The accused Bhartaram, Ugmaram, Hemaram and Mst. Premli struck blows to Surjaram with their lathies while accused Jairam, Ramsukh, Khinyaram and Bhinyaram struck blows to Baksaram with their lathies. When Mst. Kamla, Mst. Sohini, Hardeen and she tried to intervene, they too were not spared and were struck blows by the appellants and their companions. She was struck blows by accused Ugmaram. Bhartaram, Hemaram and Mst. Premli. Mst. Premli forcibly took away the gold Bor from the head of Mst. Kamla (PW 8). Accused Bhartaram forcibly took away the silver Kanthi and Madaliya and Mala from her. Accused Jairam forcibly took away the gold Kanthi from her daughter Mst. Sohini {PW 9). Accused Khinyaram forcibly took away the gold Loongs from the ears of her husband Baksaram. PW 8 Smt. Kamla also gave the version the incident in more or less the same words. She deposed that accused Bhartaram, Hema Ram, Ugmaram and Mst.Premli struck blows to Surjaram while accused Khinyaram, Bhinyaram, Ramsukh and Jairam struck blows to Baksaram with their lathies. When she and the other witnesses tried to intervene, they too were not spared and were struck blows by them. Regarding the snatching away of the gold and silver ornaments, she gave the same account as stated by PW 7 Smt. Maluri She also deposed that she was struck blows by accused Hemaram, Bhartaram and Mst. Premli. PW 9 Mst. Sohini described the occurrence in the same manner. She deposed that on hearing the cries of her brother Surjaram. she came out of the Dhani. She saw that in her field, accused Mst. Premli, Bhartaram, Ugmaram and Hemaram were striking blows to her brother Surjaram while Jairam, Ramsukh, Khinyaram and Bhinyaram were striking blows to her father Baksaram with their lathies When she, her mother and her Bhabhi tried to intervene, they and PW 6 Hardeen were also not spared. She too was struck blows by the culprits. The gold Kanthi which she was wearing was snatched away by accused Jairam. She also described as to how the other accused persons forcibly took away the gold Bor, the silver Kanthi and the gold Loong from her mother. Bhabhi and father. She is the person on whose statement Ex. P. 40, the police registered the case. The gold Kanthi which she was wearing was snatched away by accused Jairam. She also described as to how the other accused persons forcibly took away the gold Bor, the silver Kanthi and the gold Loong from her mother. Bhabhi and father. She is the person on whose statement Ex. P. 40, the police registered the case. 13. As regards accused Bhinyaram, Hemaram and Ramsukh, the learned Sessions Judge did not accept the testimony of these four injured witnesses as dependable because no act of beating was assigned to them in the F.I.R. Ex. P. 40 lodged by Mst. Sohini (PW 9). 14. It was vehemently contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the four eye witnesses referred to above have changed the manner and sequence of beating the victims. It was argued that in F.I.R. Ex. P. 40, no overact of beating was assigned to the three acquitted accused persons but during trial, ail these witnesses stated that the three acquitted accused also struck blows to them and the two deceased-victims. It was argued that since these four eye witnesses have been found unreliable and not dependable as regards the three acquitted accused persons, their evidence as against the appellants should not also be accepted as true and reliable. We have examined the contention and find it barren of substance. The evidence of these four eye witnesses was not accepted as dependable and reliable for the reasons that in the F.I.R. Ex. P. 40 no overt-act of beating was assigned to them. This is not the situation vis-a-vis the appellants. In F.I.R. Ex. P. 40 it has been clearly mentioned that the five appellants struck blows to the two deceased-victims and thus caused their death. So also it was mentioned therein that these injured witnesses were landed blows by the appellants and none else The F.I.R. is a valuable document and gives the first-hand version of the incident. It is used to check the subsequent improvements and embellishment during trial. Applying this check, the learned Sessions Judge held that the evidence of these four injured witnesses was not dependable so as to seek the conviction of the three acquitted accused persons. As regards the five appellants, the version given in the F.I.R. and during trial is consistent. 15. It was next argued that in the F.I.R. Ex. Applying this check, the learned Sessions Judge held that the evidence of these four injured witnesses was not dependable so as to seek the conviction of the three acquitted accused persons. As regards the five appellants, the version given in the F.I.R. and during trial is consistent. 15. It was next argued that in the F.I.R. Ex. P. 40 it was mentioned that the five appellants landed blows to Surjaram and Baksaram. It was also mentioned therein that the appellants struck blows to these four injured witnessses. But during trial this version given in F.I.R. Ex. P. 40 was not fully maintained and a departure was made During trial it was stated that some of these appellants struck blows to Surjaram and some struck blows to Baksaram. It was argued that this improvements must also be taken into serious consideration and the witnesses should be disbelieved on that count We are not impressed by this argument. The F.I.R. was lodged by a rustic illiterate village girl Mst. Sohini aged about 20 years. When there is a joint and concerted attack by a number of persons, it is difficult for a simple village girl to precisely recollect the manner of beating and to state who of the numerous culprits caused which of the injuries of the victims. We may reiterate that there is a consistency through out in the F.I.R. Ex. P. 40 and the statement given by these witnesses during trial that the two deceased-victims. Surjaram and Baksaram were landed blows by the appellants. It may be that some other persons (namely the acquitted accused) might have struck blows to the two deceased-victims but their evidence was not accepted as the fact was not mentioned in the F.I.R. Ex. P. 40. But that is not a good and sound reason to dismiss in toto the evidence of these four injured witnesses as against the appellants. Dismissing the evidence of a witness in toto simply because he has been found untrue as regards some of the culprits is not permissible nor a recourse should be made to such a method. The law enjoins a duty upon a criminal courts to decide the guilt or innocence of the accused on the evidence adduced by the parties. Dismissing the evidence of a witness in toto simply because he has been found untrue as regards some of the culprits is not permissible nor a recourse should be made to such a method. The law enjoins a duty upon a criminal courts to decide the guilt or innocence of the accused on the evidence adduced by the parties. This duty pre-supposes a right to the Court to scan, scrutinize, sift and evaluate the evidence to disengage the falsehood from truth and to separate the chaff from the grain. In discharging this duty, a criminal court can partly believe a witness and partly disbelieve him taking into consideration the situation and the various circumstances arising in a given case. If this process of evaluation is denied and the testimony of a witness is accepted or rejected in toto, it will lead to rediculous and at times to stupid results. As such it is always open to a Court to partly accept and partly reject the testimony of a witness by the application of the tests of judicial scrutiny In Molu versus State of Haryana (1); their lordships of the Supreme Court observed that the more fact that out of many accused some are acquitted is not sufficient to entitle the rejection of the entire prosecution evidence. The Court should make every effort to disengage the truth from the falsehood and separate the grain from the chaff, rather than taking the easy course of rejecting the entire prosecution case merely because there are some embellishments. The same view was reiterated in Ramjanam versus the State of Uttar Pradesh (2) in which it was observed that a witness disbelieved with respect to some accused is no reason for not accepting his evidence with respect to the other accused. In Jagdeep versus State of Haryana(3) their lordships of the Supreme Court held that where the evidence of a witness is not believed in regard to some of the accused who were acquitted, that does not mean that his evidence as regards participation of other accused must also be rejected. So also in Sri Satkumar versus State of Haryana (4) it was held that where the benefit of doubt is given to some of the accused on the appreciation of evidence, it cannot be taken to be a good ground to discredit the testimony of witnesses with regard to the other accused. 16. So also in Sri Satkumar versus State of Haryana (4) it was held that where the benefit of doubt is given to some of the accused on the appreciation of evidence, it cannot be taken to be a good ground to discredit the testimony of witnesses with regard to the other accused. 16. As discussed earlier, there is a consistent version through-out during investigation and trial that the two victims Surjaram and Baksaram were done to death by the five appellants. The circumstances do not allow us to hold that accused Khinyaram was a mere by-stander at the scene of occurrence. There is again a consistent version through out that the four injured witnesses were landed blows by these very five appellants. So also the version regarding the forcibly taking away of the gold and silver ornaments against the five appellants is consistent through-out. As such the contention of the learned counsel that the evidence of the four injured persons (witnesses) should not be accepted as true and dependable simply because on their evidence three culprits have been acquitted, holds no ground and we feel no hesitation in rejecting it. 17. It was next contended that no injuries were found on the person of appellant Khinyaram. No human blood was found on his clothes and the lathi recovered at his instance. It was argued that these facts indicate that accused Khinyaram was not among the miscreants who made an on - slaught on the victims. It was argued that had he been there it was expected that he would have received some injuries in the incident. The contention though attractive in appearance but is hollow in substance. It all depends on the position taken by an accused whether he receives injuries or not while landing blows to the victims. The absence of injuries on his person does not per-se show that he was not present at the place of occurrence. Likewise the fact that no human blood was found on his clothes or lathi does not show that he was not a participant in the incident. When the evidence against an accused is consistent through-out, these factors lose their significance and cannot be taken as a sound and sufficient reason to dismiss the evidence against him. The circumstances do not allow us to hold that he was a mere by-stander at the scene of occurrence. 18. When the evidence against an accused is consistent through-out, these factors lose their significance and cannot be taken as a sound and sufficient reason to dismiss the evidence against him. The circumstances do not allow us to hold that he was a mere by-stander at the scene of occurrence. 18. The next argument advanced is that the injuries of the four appellants. Jairam, Premli, Bhartaram and Ugmaram have not been explained by the four ocular witnesses. It was argued that this is an important infirmity and shows that these ocular witnesses have suppressed the truth and real facts. We again find it untenable. We have gone through the injuries reports of these four accused persons. Accused Ugmaram received two simple injuries, accused Bhartaram received only one simple injury, accused Mst. Premli received two simple bruises and accused Jairam received only one minor bruise. These injuries are not on vital parts. The failure of the prosecution witnesses to explain injuries found on the person of accused persons is not of any significance especially when the injuries are not very serious and severe. Such minor injuries may come in existence when the victims tried to put resistence in order to protect them from the assault and on-slaught. The obligation to explain injuries on the person of accused arises only when the injuries are serious and severe and not superficial. We are fortified in our view by the observation made in Jagdish vs. State of Rajasthan (5). Moreover, it does not appear a case where a right of private defence of person can be said to be available to the appellants The occurrence took place outside the Dhani of the complainant party in their field. The appellants had no reason to go there. The fact that they went there fully armed with lathies indicates that they were the aggressors and the deceased victims as well as the injured witnesses were the persons on whom assualt and on-slaught were made. 19. It is true that the four ocular witnesses are the close relatives of the two deceased-victims. But their evidence cannot be dismissed or suspected only on the ground. They were the natural witnesses of the occurrence, because the incident took place outside their Dhani in their field. Their presence was thus quite normal at the place of occurrence. 19. It is true that the four ocular witnesses are the close relatives of the two deceased-victims. But their evidence cannot be dismissed or suspected only on the ground. They were the natural witnesses of the occurrence, because the incident took place outside their Dhani in their field. Their presence was thus quite normal at the place of occurrence. Since all of them had received multiple injuries, their presence on the spot is not open to any doubt. The evidence of these four injured ocular witnesses has been accepted by the trial court as true against the appellants. On a careful scrutiny of what they testified on oath, we are unable to take a view different from that taken by the learned Sessions Judge. No criticism makes their testimony unworthy of belief or credence. It is difficult to imagine that they would leave the real assailants of their father and brother and their own and substitute the appellants in their place. 20 There is then a strong motive in the case. There was litigation between the deceased-victims and the accused Jairam. This litigation was both civil and criminal. The appellants belong to one and the same family. It appears that there was bad blood between the appellants and the complainant party. As such the appellants were prompted to finish the two victims We, therefore, hold that the appellants formed a mob, went to the Dhani of the victims and made an on-slaught on the two deceased - victims and the four eye witnesses, as a result of which Surjaram and Baksaram lost their lives and the four eye witnesses sustained multiple injuries. 21. It was next argued that the finding of the trial court that the appellants formed an unlawful assembly with the common object to commit the murders is not sound and should be set-aside. It was argued that there is neither evidence nor circumstances to point out that the appellants wanted to given only a severe beating to the victims and as such they were wrongly held guilty for the offence under section 302, with the aid of Section 149, I.P.C. 22. Now, whether an unlawful assembly was formed and what exactly was the common object of the assembly must be judged from the facts and circumstances of the case Direct evidence is seldom available to prove the formation of the common object. Now, whether an unlawful assembly was formed and what exactly was the common object of the assembly must be judged from the facts and circumstances of the case Direct evidence is seldom available to prove the formation of the common object. As such the object of the assembly is largely a matter of inferences from the acts committed by the accused persons, their conduct and the surrounding circumstances. The formation of an unlawful assembly and the common object for which it is formed are the questions of fact and like all other facts must be proved by the prosecution. The formation of an unlawful assembly is not to be assumed merely because five or more culprits have been put to trial. If the formation of an unlawful assembly and the common object for which it is formed stand proved, it is then not necessary to establish precisely what part each member took in the incident. If the common object to commit a particular offence is established and the offence is committed in prosecution of that common object, every member of such an unlawful assembly is liable for that particular offence under the first part of section 149, I. P. C, even in absence of any overt-act by him Section 149 I.P.C. constitutes in itself a substantive offence. 23. In the instant case the facts and circumstances heavily speak against the appellants. They were atleast five in number (after the acquittal of the three). They went together to the Dhani of the victims at unusual time i.e the dawn-break. They went fully armed with lathies. They had not gone to the Dhani of the victims for any innocent purpose. As soon as they reached the Dhani of the victims, they opened an on slaught on the deceased-victim Surjaram and caused severe injuries to him including the vital parts. When Surjarams father Baksaram tried to intervene to rescue his son, he too was not spared and done to death by striking numerous blows to him including the vital part. The appellants were not satisfied even then. When the injured (being the close relatives of the deceased-victims) tried to intervene, they too were struck blows and not spared. These facts and circumstances unerringly point out that the common object of the unlawful assembly formed by the appellants was to commit the murders of Surjaram and Baksaram. The appellants were not satisfied even then. When the injured (being the close relatives of the deceased-victims) tried to intervene, they too were struck blows and not spared. These facts and circumstances unerringly point out that the common object of the unlawful assembly formed by the appellants was to commit the murders of Surjaram and Baksaram. These facts and circumstances do not permit us to hold that the common object of the unlawful assembly was only to give a severe beating to the deceased-victims. 24. We may also point out that injuries No. 13 and 14 of Baksaram and injury No. 2 of Surjaram were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, as per medical evidence of Dr. Tulsaram (PW5). Since the onslaught on the two deceased-victims was joint and concerted, it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove as to who caused the fatal injuries to the two deceased-victims. As soon as the common object to commit the murders is there, if he comes meaning-less to find out the real author of the fatal injuries, the murders of the two victims was not a stray act of any single accused but were committed in prosecution of the common object of the unlawful assembly formed by the appellants. The appellants were, therefore, rightly held guilty under section 302/149, I.P.C. 25. As regards the charge under section 379, I.P.C. there is again the consistent evidence of the four eye witnesses that the gold and silver ornaments were snatched away from them by the four appellants (except appellant Ugma Ram). They were later on recovered in consequence of the disclosure statements made by them As such the conviction of the four appellants under section 379, I.P.C. is proper. 26. No other contention was raised before us. 27. For the reasons discussed above, we find no force in these appeals of the appellants. They were rightly convicted and sentenced under sections 302/ 149 and others of the Penal Code. No interference is called for. 28. In the result, the appeals of appellants Jairam, Smt. Premli, Bharta Ram, Khinyaram and Ugmaram are dismissed. Accused Ugmaram and Mst. Premli are on bail. They are allowed one months time to Surrender in the trial court, failing which learned Sessions Judge, Merta will get them arrested and send them to jail to serve out the unexpired portion of their sentence. 29. Accused Ugmaram and Mst. Premli are on bail. They are allowed one months time to Surrender in the trial court, failing which learned Sessions Judge, Merta will get them arrested and send them to jail to serve out the unexpired portion of their sentence. 29. The Appeals are disposed of accordingly.