SUDHANSU SEKHAR GANGULY. J. ( 1 ) THIS is an appeal from the judgment and order of conviction passed by Shri I. Sambui, Addi. Sessions Judge, Purulia on 22nd March, 1986 in Sessions Case No. 98 of 1984, Sessions Trial No. 6 of 1986. The prosecution case as it appears from the evidence seems to be the following: ( 2 ) THE informant Anil Mahato, almost all the eye-witnesses and an the accused are residents of village-Chakirban under Purulia (Mofassil) P. S. The informant happens to be the M. R. (Modified Ration) Dealer of his village. Some of the villagers thought that Anil charged them more for goods short supplied and they applied to the relevant office of the Food Supplies Department for transferring their cards to the shop of the M. R. Dealer at Balarampur. At the instance of Anil a meeting was called by the President and the Secretary of the local M. R. Dealers Union. The meeting was held in the field in front of the local primary school and the proceeding of the meeting started at about 2. 00 p. m. on 31st December, 1982. Anil attended the meeting with a number of his relations including his brother Nagen Mahato. A large number of men attended the meeting. The President and the Secretary requested the villagers not to transfer their cards to another village. The applicants accepted their proposal. Some of them told Anil to withdraw a dacoity case that he had started against one Bibhuti Gope and others. Anil did not agree and this led to a quarrel. At this time the accused persons left the spot and they came back immediately thereafter armed with axes and lathis. Two of them viz, appellants Bhabatosh and Saran an caught hold of Nagen, the brother of Anil, while the appellant Kalipada hit him on his head with an axe: Nagen collapsed to the ground. Anils brother Jagannath (P. W. 4) their uncle Ganesh (P. W. 2) and their cousins Kumed and Samir (P. Ws. 3 and 19) ran to his aid when the appellants assaulted and injured them with lathis and axes. ( 3 ) ANIL and others went to Nagen. He was found dead. Meanwhile one Shantiram Mahato had informed the local Police Station about the incident over the phone (Ext. 3 and 19) ran to his aid when the appellants assaulted and injured them with lathis and axes. ( 3 ) ANIL and others went to Nagen. He was found dead. Meanwhile one Shantiram Mahato had informed the local Police Station about the incident over the phone (Ext. 2/0 and the Police arrived at the spot at or about 4-15 p. m. Anil handed over to the officer a written statement (Ext. 1/i) of the incident which was treated as the F. I. R. and over which a case was started. Investigation was taken up immediately and some of the accused were arrested and others surrendered, ( 4 ) ORIGINALLY twelve accused were sent up for trial before the Session Court. Of them one was found a minor and his case was separated from the rest for his trial under the Children's Act. The remaining eleven stood their trial before the learned Sessions Judge. ( 5 ) THE learned Sessions Judge framed charges: (1) against an the eleven accused under (a) section 148 I. P. C. for committing the offence of forming an unlawful assembly with the common object of (1) murdering Nagen and Anil and (d) injuring the P. Ws. , Kumed, Ganesh, Jagannath and Samir and (b) under section 149/302 I. P. C. for committing the offence of murder by causing Nagens death intentionally in pursuance of the common object of the unlawful assembly; (2) against accused Kalipada alone under section 323 I. P. C. for voluntarily causing hurt to Jagannath Mahato, P. W. 4; (3) against accused Kalipada alone under section 324 I. P. C. for voluntarily causing hurt to Komed Mahato, P. W. 3 with an axe. (4) against accused Saranan alone under section 323 I P. C. for voluntarily causing hurt to Ganesh Mahato, P. W. No. 2. ( 6 ) IN the trial that followed the prosecution examined not less than 26 witnesses quite a number of whom claimed to be eye-witnesses of the incident. The doctor who held postmortem on the dead body of Nagen and examined the injured witnesses were also examined. In their statements under section 313 Cr. P. C. two of the accused viz. Saranan and Radhanath admitted their presence in the meeting on that day but denied the other allegations. The other accused persons either denied the holding of the meeting or their presence in the same. In their statements under section 313 Cr. P. C. two of the accused viz. Saranan and Radhanath admitted their presence in the meeting on that day but denied the other allegations. The other accused persons either denied the holding of the meeting or their presence in the same. ( 7 ) ON a consideration of the materials on record the learned Judge acquitted one of the eleven accused; viz. Kulada alias Sridam Mahato of both the charges under sections 148 and 302/149 I. P C. He convicted the remaining ten accused both under sections 148 and 302/149 I. P. C. and he sentenced each of them to three years R. I. under the first count and to imprisonment for life under the second. While acquitting the accused Kalipada of the charge under section 323 I. P. C. for causing hurt to Jagannath, he convicted him under section 324 I. P. C. for causing hurt to Kumed with an axe and he sentenced him to three years R. I. on this count. He, however, acquitted Saranan Pitan of the charge under section 323 I. P. C. for causing hurt to Ganesh. ( 8 ) HENCE, this appeal from the side of the ten convicted accused. It is urged from their side that the learned Judge made a grievous mistake by convicting them on the evidence of so-called eye-witnesses who were both partisan and interested being nearly related to the deceased Nagen and the informant Anil besides being supporters of the C. P. I. (M) whereas the convicted accused are also supporters of the. Congress. It is also urged that the learned Judge overlooked that the evidence of the prosecution witnesses bristled with contradictions and discrepancies. The Points: ( 9 ) POINTS, which arise for decision in this appeal are as to whether (I) on the evidence on record the learned Judge was justified in holding the appellants guilty and (2) if he was also justified in punishing them in the manner stated above. Decision: ( 10 ) THERE is very good evidence on record to show that on 31-12-82 a person who identified himself as Shantiram Mahato rang up the Purulia Mufassil P. S. at 15. Decision: ( 10 ) THERE is very good evidence on record to show that on 31-12-82 a person who identified himself as Shantiram Mahato rang up the Purulia Mufassil P. S. at 15. 35 p. m. and informed S. I. Panda (P W. 26) of that P. S. about a serious trouble which was going on at the village of Chakirban in the course of which a person had already been killed. This information was recorded in the G. D. of the P. S. (Ext. 2/1 ). We may as well add here that the prosecution instead of treating this information a F. I R. treated the subsequent written information (Ext. 1/1) submitted by P. W. Anil (P. W. 1) as the F. I. R. in this case. The learned Judge also likewise as he felt that the in formation given by the telephonic message was too scrappy. Before us the learned Advocate for the appellants made a grievance on this score urging that the telephonic message being the earlier one in point of time and (Ext 2/1) having disclosed a cognizable offence ought to have been treated as the F. I. R. in this case. The point is not free from controversy altogether, more so as the sender of the telephonic message was not produced before the court and he seemed to be unknown to the people of the locality (See Tapinder v. Punjab1); but since even the learned Public Prosecutor is of the same view in this regard as the learned Advocate for the appellants we are not inclined to enter into the vexed question as to which of the two information should be treated as the F. I. R. in this case. Throughout this judgment we have treated the telephonic message (Ext. 2/1) as the F. I. R. in this case and the written information of Anil (Ext. III) we have treated merely as his statement under section 161 Cr. P. C. ( 11 ) BE that as it may, it appears that on receipt of the telephonic message (Ext. 2/1) S. I. Panda, the then O. C. of Purulia Mufassil P. S. , S. I. Adhikary and S. I. Pahari (P. Ws. 26 and 23) of the same P. S. reached Chekirban at about 16. P. C. ( 11 ) BE that as it may, it appears that on receipt of the telephonic message (Ext. 2/1) S. I. Panda, the then O. C. of Purulia Mufassil P. S. , S. I. Adhikary and S. I. Pahari (P. Ws. 26 and 23) of the same P. S. reached Chekirban at about 16. 25 hours when they found the dead body of Nagenidentified by his brother Anil (P. W. 1)-lying on the village road near the temple of Han, with one bleeding incised injury on his head. The dead body was sent to the Sadar Hospital, Purulia, for post-mortem and bood stained earth (P. Ws. 21, 22) from the spot where the dead body was lying was also seized (Ext. II and 3/1 ). Ganesh, Kumed, Jagannath and Samir (P Ws. 2 t04 and 19) were also sent by S. 1. Panda (P. W. 23) to Sadar Hospital, Purulia for their examination and treatment. ( 12 ) THE four injured were examined that very day by Dr. K. B. Singh, the then D. M. O. , Purulia (P. W 20) from 5. 30 p. m. onwards. He found two incised injuries of recent origin on the temporal