BYAS, J.—These two appeals—one through Jail and the other represented, are directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Jalore dated September 24, 1977 and the order dated September 28, 1977, by which appellant Uttamsingh was convicted under section 302 and the appellant Uksingh alias Kesarsingh was convicted under section 302/34, I. P. C. and each was sentenced to imprisonment for life. Accused Uksingh was also convicted under section 323 I. P. C. and sentenced to three months simple imprisonment by the same judgement. The two accused have come-up in appeals and challenge their convictions. 2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that in the afternoon on February 25, 1977, PW 1 Poonma and his brother PW 2 Harka were irrigating their field situated in Mauja Nawapura P. S. Bhinmal district Jalore. Their father Tola the deceased-victim in the case-was sitting there in a hut while their mother PW 3 Smt. Jethi was working in Barada. The appellants, who are real brothers inter se, went to the said field and asked PW 1 Poonma to give them subscription on account of the coming Holi festival and also to provide money to them for their drinks. Poonma expressed his inability to oblige them as he was a poor man. Accused Uksingh gave some slaps to him. Poonma raised cries and his father Tola came there and asked the appellants as to why they were beating his son. Accused Uttamsingh thereupon lifted a Jatri (heavy stick) and struck a blow with it on the head of Tola. The incident was seen by PW 2 Harka, PW 3 Smt. Jethi and PW 4 Bhura. Tola did not survive and passed away after sometime. PW 1 Poonma went to the Police Station, Bhinmal and verbally lodged report Ex. P. 1 of the occurrence at about 9.00 a.m. on the next day. The police registered a case and proceeded with the investigation. The Station House Officer Madan Lal arrived on the site. He prepared the site plan and the inquest report of the victims dead body. The post-mortem examination on the victims dead body was conducted at about 2.30 p m. on the same day by PW 8 Dr. S. C. Mathur the then Medical Officer Incharge, Primary Health Centre, Bhinmal. The doctor noticed one external and some internal injuries over the head of the victim. In his opinion, the cause of. The post-mortem examination on the victims dead body was conducted at about 2.30 p m. on the same day by PW 8 Dr. S. C. Mathur the then Medical Officer Incharge, Primary Health Centre, Bhinmal. The doctor noticed one external and some internal injuries over the head of the victim. In his opinion, the cause of. death was coma due to head injury. The accused were arrested and after when the investigation was over, the police presented a challan against them in the court of the Judicial Magistrate, Bhinmal, who, in his turn, committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed a charge under section 302 against accused Uttamsingh and under sections 323 and 302/34, I. P. C against accused Uksingh alias Kesarsingh. Both the accused pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined twelve witnesses and filed some documents. In defence, the accused adduced no evidence On the conclusion of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge held the charges duly proved against the appellants. They were consequently convicted and sentenced as mentioned at the very out-set. Aggrieved against their convictions, the accused have taken these appeals. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor. We have also gone through the case file carefully. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants did not challenge the opinion of PW 8 Dr. Mathur relating to the cause of death of the deceased-victim Tola. We have also gone through his statement and find no reasons to distrust his opinion. The death of Tola was homicidal and not natural. 5. In assailing the conviction, it was contended by the learned counsel that there was not an iota of evidence against the appellants. The four eye-witnesses, viz., PW 1 Poonma, PW 2 Harka, PW 3 Smt. Jethi and PW 4 Bhura lent no support to the prosecution. They were declared hostile and despite cross-examination nothing could be elicited from them which may connect the appellants with the murder of Tola. It is a case of absolutely no evidence against the appellants and their conviction cannot be sustained on any ground. In reply, the learned Public Prosecutor made every effort to sustain the conviction. 6. They were declared hostile and despite cross-examination nothing could be elicited from them which may connect the appellants with the murder of Tola. It is a case of absolutely no evidence against the appellants and their conviction cannot be sustained on any ground. In reply, the learned Public Prosecutor made every effort to sustain the conviction. 6. Needless to say that the prosecution has examined PW 1 Poonma, PW 2 Harka, PW 3 Smt. Jethi and PW 4 Bhura as the ocular witnesses of the incident. The first two are the sons of the deceased, the third is his widow and the fourth is alleged to be the person who was with the appellants. All these witnesses lent no support to the prosecution. Except PW 1 Poonma, the remaining three were declared hostile. 7. PW 1 Poonma stated that two persons came to his field and one of them struck a blow of lathi on his fathers head. He did not know them before hand and their names were disclosed to him by PW 4 Bhura. In his cross-examination, he clearly stated that the appellants were not those persons who had come to his field and caused the death of his father Tola. When asked as to how he mentioned their names in the F. I. R. Ex. P. 1, his ready reply was that the names of the miscreants, who had killed his father, were disclosed to him by PW 4 Bhura. The testimony of this witness, thus, in no way, helps the prosecution. 8. PW 2 Harka, PW 3 Smt. Jethi and PW 4 Bhura turned hostile and lent no support to the prosecution. PW 4 Bhura went to the extent that he was not present on the spot and had seen any incident. PW 2 Harka and PW 3 Smt. Jethi stated that they did not see anybody striking blow to the deceased Tola. Both of them did not identify the appellants as the assailants of Tola. All these three witnesses were declared hostile, but nothing could be elicited from them which may be helpful to the prosecution. In fact, they stated nothing against the appellants. 9. It is, thus, a case of nil evidence against the appellants. We fail to understand what prevailed over the learned Sessions Judge to connect the appellants with the murder of Tola and to convict them. In fact, they stated nothing against the appellants. 9. It is, thus, a case of nil evidence against the appellants. We fail to understand what prevailed over the learned Sessions Judge to connect the appellants with the murder of Tola and to convict them. It appears that the parties arrived at a compromise and therefore, even the sons and the widow of the deceased victim turned hostile and did not support the prosecution. Any way, we are unable to maintain the conviction of the appellants. 10. In the result, the appeals are allowed. The conviction of accused Uttamsingh under section 302, I. P. C. and the convictions of accused Uksingh alias Kesarsingh under section 302/34 and 323, I. P. C. and the sentences awarded to them thereunder are set-aside. They are acquitted of the offences they were charged with. They are on bail and need not surrender. Their bail bonds shall stand cancelled.