JUDGMENT 1. - This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Jhalawar, dated 4th November, 1980, convicting and sentencing the accused persons in the following manner:- Under Section 302 IPC : Life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo six months rigorous imprisonment to each of the accused appellants. Under Section 307 IPC : Each of the accused appellant to undergo 7 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine, to further undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 326 IPC : Accused appellant Bhanwar Singh 5 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 326/34 IPC : Accused appellant Vikaram Singh Five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 months rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 325 IPC : Accused appellant Vikram Singh to 4 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 months R.I. Under Section 325/34 IPC : Accused Bhanwar Singh to 4 years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 590/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 months, rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 323 IPC : Accused appellant Vikram Singh to one year's imprisonment. Under Section 323/34 IPC : Accused appellant Bhanwar Singh to one year's rigorous imprisonment. 2. In the incident which took place on 29-7-79, at about 11-12 O' clock in the day, Banney Singh aged about 15 years died and PW 3 Samad Bai mother of Banney Singh and PW 4 Phek Kanwar sister of Banney Singh also received injuries at the hands of the accused persons. Learned Sessions Judge has placed reliance on the statements of PW 3 Samad Bai and PW 4 Phek Kanwar who were also injured in the incident. We have also gone through the statements of these witnesses and we do not find any illegality or irregularity in the appreciation of their evidence by the learned Sessions Judge. According to the prosecution case, accused Bhanwar Singh was armed with farsi and accused Vikram Singh was armed with a lathi. The husband of Samad Bai PW 3 was already undergoing sentence in the jail. According to the prosecution case, accused Bhanwar Singh was armed with farsi and accused Vikram Singh was armed with a lathi. The husband of Samad Bai PW 3 was already undergoing sentence in the jail. There was some dispute over the land between the husband of Samad Bai and one Hamer Singh. The accused Vikram is the brother of Hamer Singh. Samad Bai has stated that on the day of incident she had gone to her field at about 10 A.M. His son Banney Singh aged about 12 years and Pura Chamar were hired on labour. Her daughter Phek Kanwar was along with Banney Singh. Phek Kanwar told Samad Bai that Da-Sahib have taken Banney Singh and were carrying him. Both the accused persons Bhanwar Singh and Vikram Singh had taken away Banney Singh when he was fixing bushes in the field. Samad Bai further stated that he immediately went running towards Banney Singh and saw the accused persons Bhanwar Singh and Vikram Singh beating Banney Singh. Accused Bhanwar Singh was armed with a farsi and Vikram Singh with a lathi. The accused Bhanwar Singh inflicted blows by a farsi on the left leg and head of Banney Singh. Samad Bai further stated that she fell on Banney Singh in order to rescue him but then accused Bhanwar Singh inflicted blow by farsi which hit her on the head. Accused Bhanwar Singh also inflicted injuries on her hands and feet. Accused Vikram Singh has also inflicted injuries on Banney Singh by lathies. Though a lengthy cross-examination has been done of these witnesses but nothing material has been brought out in order to discard their testimony. Banney Singh died on account of the injuries on the spot and his autopsy was conducted by PW 9, Dr. Intkhasae Huq on 30-7-1979, at 4.45 P.M. On external examination of the dead body of Banney Singh, he found twenty injuries. On internal examination, it was found that there was depressed fracture of the occipital bone.His brain was congested. Membranes were ruptured and occipital bone of right side was also compressed. In the opinion of the doctor the death of Banney Singh was caused due to fracture in the skull and intra cranial hemorrhage and shock. The injuries of Samad Bai were also examined and it was found that there were 15 injuries on her body. Membranes were ruptured and occipital bone of right side was also compressed. In the opinion of the doctor the death of Banney Singh was caused due to fracture in the skull and intra cranial hemorrhage and shock. The injuries of Samad Bai were also examined and it was found that there were 15 injuries on her body. Out of the above 15 injuries there were four incised wounds and other abrasions and contusions. The doctor PW 9 Intkhasae Huq also stated that injury No. 1 of Samad Bai was such that could have caused her death. It was also found that there was a fracture on right parietal bone of Samad Bai. Thus there were several incised wounds and grievous injuries on the body of Samad Bai herself and her presence at the time of incident cannot be doubted. Apart from that, nine injuries were also found on the body of Phek Kanwar PW 4 a girl of 12 years of age. She has also supported the prosecution case and it is proved from the evidence of Samad Bai and Phek Kanwar that the accused persons were responsible for causing the injuries on Banney Singh, Samad Bai and Phek Kanwar. There can be no manner of doubt that injuries No. I and 2 found on the body of Banny Singh were fatal and sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death as stated by the doctor and the same were inflicted by Bhanwar Singh. He has thus been rightly convicted under Section 302 IPC and other Sections of Indian Penal Code. 3. So far as accused Vikram Singh is concerned, according to the prosecution witnesses, he was armed with lathi and from the evidence of doctor PW 9, it is difficult to hold definitely that which injury was inflicted by him, which might be said to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. However, it is proved beyond any manner of doubt that he had reached on the spot along with co-accused Bhanwar Sings). He was associated from the very beginning with Bhanwar Singh in the crime. He was having a motive also to commit the crime as there was a dispute regarding land between his brother and husband of Smt. Samad Bai. However, it is proved beyond any manner of doubt that he had reached on the spot along with co-accused Bhanwar Sings). He was associated from the very beginning with Bhanwar Singh in the crime. He was having a motive also to commit the crime as there was a dispute regarding land between his brother and husband of Smt. Samad Bai. From the medical evidence, it is also proved beyond any manner of doubt that there were several injuries found on the body of deceased Banney Singh and Samad Bai, which were caused by a blunt weapon like lathi. Only two accused persons viz., Bhanwar Singh and Vikram Singh have committed the crime and Bhanwar Singh was armed with farsi while Vikram Singh was armed with a lathi. Thus taking in view the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the manner in which the injuries were inflicted and found on the body of Banney Singh, Samad Bai and Phek Kanwar, it is clearly proved that Vikram Singh had also common intention to cause death of Banney Singh alongwith Bhanwar Singh and had also common intention to inflict grievious injuries on Samad Bai. 4. In view of these circumstances, the conviction and sentence awarded to the accused appellants by the learned Sessions Judge is maintained with the only modification that the conviction of accused appellant Vikram Singh is changed from section 302 IPC to section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. 5. In the result, we do not find any force in the appeal and it is dismissed summarily.Appeal dismissed. *******