JUDGMENT 1. - Since all these five appeals are directed against one and the same judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara dated April 11, 1977, they were heard together and are disposed of by a single judgment. By the impugned judgment, the appellants Chittar, Duda, Soni alias Sonnath, Lala, Bheru, Lal Mohammed alias Lala Musalman and Bahu were convicted under Section 302/149, Indian Penal Code and each was sentenced to imprisonment for life. By the same judgment, they were also convicted under Section 147, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment. Sentences were directed to run concurrently. The accused have come-up in appeals and challenge their convictions. 2. At about 6.30 p.m. on February 20, 1976, PW 1 Hari Lal appeared at Police Station, Shahpura district Bhilwara and presented written report Ex. P 1. It was stated therein that on receiving information from C.W. 2 Mohan that his (PW 1 Hari Lal's) brother Ladu was severely beaten and was lying near the field of Vishna Mali, he immediately went on a bicycle to the field where Ladu was lying in a severely injured condition. Ladu told him that he was assaulted and belaboured by Chittar, Duda, Bheru, Lala, Soni, Babu and Lala Musalman (appellants), and one Shanker. These persons struck blows to him with sword, axe, Farshi and lathis. The Station House Officer PW 10 Nahar Singh ascertained some more facts from PW 1 Hari Lal, which he endorsed on the back of Ex. P 1. The further interrogation of PWIH are Lal revealed that while Ladu was being taken in a bullock-cart to the Hospital at Shahpura for treatment, he passed away in the way. The police registered a case under Sections 302/149 and 148, Indian Penal Code and swung into action. The Station House Officer went to the hospital and prepared the inquest report of the victim's dead body. The investigation revealed that Ladu was assaulted and belaboured by the accused at two places-first near the field of one Gokul Bhil and thereafter near the field of Vishna Mali. The Investigating Officer visited both the spots and lifted blood-stained soil from there and sealed the same. The post-mortem examination on the victim's dead body was conducted on February 21, 1976 by PW 8 Dr. Deo Narain, the then Medical Officer. General Hospital, Shahpura. The Investigating Officer visited both the spots and lifted blood-stained soil from there and sealed the same. The post-mortem examination on the victim's dead body was conducted on February 21, 1976 by PW 8 Dr. Deo Narain, the then Medical Officer. General Hospital, Shahpura. He found seventeen injuries over the victim's dead body caused by sharp and blunt weapons. The doctor was of the opinion that the cause of death was shock and haemorrhage due to multiple cut wounds and multiple fractures of bones. The post-mortem examination report prepared by him is Ex. P 8. The blood-stained clothes of the victim were seized and sealed. Four of the appellants were arrested next day in the morning. The others were arrested after some days. In consequence of the informations furnished by them whilst under police custody, the shoes of the deceased, one lathi and one Farshi were recovered. The investigation further revealed that the incident was seen by the victim's brother Mahaveer (PW 2). After when the investigation was over, the police presented a crime report against the appellants and Shanker Lal in the Court of the Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Shahpura, who in his turn, committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges under Sections 302/149 and 148 Indian Penal Code against them all, to which they pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. They denounced the whole prosecution story as a false and fabricated piece of concoction and cLalmed absolute innocence. None of the accused, except Chittar, assigned any reason for his false implication. Accused Chittar, in his statement under Section 313, Cr. PC stated that PW 3 Ratna Kahar was on inimical terms with him. He further stated that the deceased, his brothers Mahaveer and Heera Lal and his father Chhoga Lal had beaten him for which he had lodged a criminal case, which was pending in a judicial court. In support of its case, the prosecution examined ten witnesses and filed some documents. In defence, the accused examined five witnesses. Two persons Babu (CW 1) and Mohan (CW 2) were examined as Court witnesses. On the conclusion of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge found the prosecution case doubtful as against accused Shanker Lal, who had adduced evidence of alibi in his defence. He was, therefore, acquitted. In defence, the accused examined five witnesses. Two persons Babu (CW 1) and Mohan (CW 2) were examined as Court witnesses. On the conclusion of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge found the prosecution case doubtful as against accused Shanker Lal, who had adduced evidence of alibi in his defence. He was, therefore, acquitted. The learned Sessions Judge held the charges duly proved against the remaining seven accused persons. They were, therefore, convicted and sentenced, as mentioned at the very out-set. Aggrieved against their conviction, the accused have come-up in appeals. 3. Before proceeding with the contentions raised at the Bar, it would be useful to point out that the prosecution adduced both direct and circumstantial evidence in order to prove the charges against the appellants. The direct evidence is of PW 2 Mahaveer, who had cLalmed to have seen the incident at both the places where the appellants were assaulting and belabouring the deceased Ladu. The circumstantial evidence was that of dying declarations made by the deceased Ladu before PW 1 Hari Lal, PW 3 Ratna, PW 6 Smt. Kani, PW 9 Chittar Lal, CW 1 Balu and CW 2 Mohan. The learned Sessions Judge disbelieved the eye witness Mahaveer PW 2 and held that he had falsely introduced himself as an ocular witness of the incident. PW 9 Chittar Lal turned hostile to the prosecution. CW 1 Bulu, before whom the dying declaration was alleged to have been made, lent no support to the prosecution. The learned Sessions Judge, however, accepted the testimonies of PW 1 Hari Lal PW, 3 Ratna, PW 6 Smt. Kani and CW 2 Mohan relating to dying declarations of the deceased-victim. He found them to be reliable witnesses and held, on the strength of what they deposed, that the deceased had made dying declarations before them. The dying declarations according to the learned Sessions Judge were sufficient to prove the guilt against the appellants. 4. It may be stated that the learned counsel for the appellants did not challenge the opinion of Dr. Deo Narain relating to the cause of death of the victim. We need not, therefore, touch his evidence in details. Suffice it to say that seventeen injuries were found over the victim's dead body caused by sharp and blunt weapons. His death was the result of these injuries. The death of the victim Ladu was, thus, homicidal and not natural. Deo Narain relating to the cause of death of the victim. We need not, therefore, touch his evidence in details. Suffice it to say that seventeen injuries were found over the victim's dead body caused by sharp and blunt weapons. His death was the result of these injuries. The death of the victim Ladu was, thus, homicidal and not natural. 5. In impeaching the conviction, the first contention raised by the learned counsel is that the FIR Ex. P 1 is not a genuine and innocent document. It was not presented at 6.30 p.m. on February 20, 1976 as stated by PW 1 Hari Lal and the Investigating Officer PW 10 Nahar Singh. The formal FIR prepared in the prescribed proforma is Ex. P 9. It was received in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate, Shahpura on February 23, 1976. When the Court of the Magistrate is situate in the same town Shahpura, where the case was registered by the police, the late receipt of the FIR Ex. P 9 in the Coutt the Magistrate shows that it was prepared later on. It was thus, ante-timed, ante-dated and post-investigation document. We find no substance in this contention. It was true that Ex. P 9 was received in the Court on February 23, 1976. The late receipt of the FIR in the Court, at times, raises a suspicion that it is an ante-timed or ante-dated document. But that is not the situation here in the instant case. Ex. P 9 was prepared at 6.30 p.m. on February 20, 1976. Four accused persons Chhttar, Lala, Duda, Lal Mohd, alias Lala Musalman were arrested in the morning of February 21, 1976, that is, within fourteen hours of the lodging of the FIR. These accused could not have been arrested unless the case was registered. Their arrest memos are Ex. P 12, Ex. P 13, Ex. P 14 and Ex P 15. It has not been suggested that though these four accused were arrested on some latter day, but their arrests were shown on a prior day. The fact that the aforesaid four accused persons were arrested early in the morning on February 21, 1976 destroys the contention that the FIR Ex. P 1 of Ex. P 9 is a belated, ante-timed, ante-dated and post investigation document which was later on fabricated to suit the prosecution as the exigencies arose. The fact that the aforesaid four accused persons were arrested early in the morning on February 21, 1976 destroys the contention that the FIR Ex. P 1 of Ex. P 9 is a belated, ante-timed, ante-dated and post investigation document which was later on fabricated to suit the prosecution as the exigencies arose. The contention that the FIR is an ante-timed or ante-dated document is life-less. 6. It was next contended that the appellants were convicted solely on the dying declarations made by the deceased Ladu. It was argued that when PW 2 Mahaveer, who cLalmed to have seen the entire incident, was disbelieved by the Court below, prudence requires that the evidence relating to dying declarations should have been rejected. When the prosecution is guilty of introducing a false ocular witness, where lies the guarantee that the dying declarations were not falsely introduced by the prosecution witnesses. It was also argued that dying declaration is a weak type of evidence and unless corroborated in material particulars, should not be made the basis of conviction. It was further argued that the evidence relating to dying declarations is discrepant, inconsistent and unworthy of belief. We were taken through the evidence of the witnesses speaking about the dying declarations alleged to have been made by the deceased Ladu. 7. It is true that PW 2 Mahaveer, who professed to have seen the entire incident from its commencement to its end has been disbelieved by the learned Sessions Judge. He held that PW 2 Mahaveer has falsely introduced himself as an ocular witness of the incident. We agree with the learned counsel for the appellants that they were convicted solely on the basis of the dying declarations. We also agree with them that when PW 2 Mahaveer was disbelieved by the trial court, prudence requires that the evidence of the witnesses speaking about the dying declarations should be closely and carefully scrutinized. We are, however, unable to agree with them that the dying declaration is a weak type of evidence and conviction should not be based solely on dying declaration unless corroborated in material particulars from independent sources. 8. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court had occasions from time to time to consider the dying declaration. We are, however, unable to agree with them that the dying declaration is a weak type of evidence and conviction should not be based solely on dying declaration unless corroborated in material particulars from independent sources. 8. Their Lordships of the Supreme Court had occasions from time to time to consider the dying declaration. The principles Lald down by their Lordships may be summarised as under: (1) There is neither rule of law nor of prudence that dying declaration cannot be acted upon without corroboration (vide : Nannu Raja v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1976 Supreme Court 2199 ); (2) If the court is satisfied that the dying declaration is, true, and voluntary it can base conviction on it without corroboration, vide: V. S. Mour v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1978 Supreme Court 519 ); (3) For this purpose the court has to apply strictest scrutiny and has to be on guard to ensure that the declaration is not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination and that the deceased had opportunity to observe and identify the assailants and was in fit state to make the declaration, (vide: Ramchandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor, AIR 1976 Supreme Court 1994 ); and (4) Where dying declaration is suspicious it should not be acted upon without corroborative evidence, (vide : Rashid Beg v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1974 Supreme Court 332 ). 9. Keeping these principles in view, we will next examine the evidence relating to dying declarations. 10. The prosecution has examined PW 1 Hari Lal, PW 3 Ratna, PW 6 Smt. Kani and PW 9 Chhittar Lal to prove the dying declarations. In defence, the accused examined DW 3 Shrawan and DW 4 Uda while, CW 1 Balu and CW 2 Mohan were examined as court witnesses. PW 1 Hari Lal is the brother, PW 6 Smt. Kani is the widow and GW'2 Mohan is the maternal cousin of the deceased-victim Ladu. PW 3 Ratna, PW 9 Chhittar and CW 1 Balu are independent persons. 11. PW 3 Ratna deposed that in the noon of the day of the incident he was working in his field. At about 2.00 or 20.30 p.m., he left his that field and proceeded to his another field situate at some distance. PW 3 Ratna, PW 9 Chhittar and CW 1 Balu are independent persons. 11. PW 3 Ratna deposed that in the noon of the day of the incident he was working in his field. At about 2.00 or 20.30 p.m., he left his that field and proceeded to his another field situate at some distance. When he reached the field of Kishna Mali, he found Ladu (the deceased-victim) lying in an injured condition on the "MED" of the field. There were multiple severe wounds over his body and blood was coming out. He went to him to render help. Ladu asked him to provide water to him. He brought water from the nearby water channel and gave it to Ladu. Ladu told him that he was assaulted and belaboured by Shanker and the appellants Chhittar, Soniya, Duda, Lala, Bheru and Lal Mohammed. He also told him that the miscreants had used weapons in inflicting blows to him. The witness further stated that he immediately went to the house of Ladu where he met his wife Smt. Kani (PW 6) and apprised her of the incident. They arranged a bullock-cart and he Smt. Kani, Mohan, Hari Lal, the father of the deceased and Chhittar Kalal went together to the place where Ladu was lying in an injured condition. They had taken the bullock-cart to bring the victim in it. When they reached there, Ladu was alive and speaking. They brought him in the bullock-cart but before they could reach the hospital, he breathed his last. He is an independent person having no grudge or enmity against the appellants. It also does not appear that he had any soft corner for the deceased. His name has been mentioned in the FIR Ex. P 1, which was lodged within two/three hours of the incident. In their statements recorded under Section 313, Cr. PC none of the appellants tried to challenge his testimony. None stated that he was on inimical terms with them. Of course, accused Chhittar stated that he had some dispute with this witness, but did not disclose the particulars of the dispute. Strangely enough, no question was put in cross-examination to this witness that there was any dispute between him and the accused Chhittar. It is true that he was examined during investigation by police on February 24, 1976. But that does not render his testimony unworthy of credit. Strangely enough, no question was put in cross-examination to this witness that there was any dispute between him and the accused Chhittar. It is true that he was examined during investigation by police on February 24, 1976. But that does not render his testimony unworthy of credit. The Investigating Officer was not asked as to explain the late examination of this witness during investigation. Apart from that, as we have pointed out earlier, that the name of this witness has been mentioned in the FIR Ex. P 1. When a close scrutiny of the entire prosecution case is made, it will reveal that this witness Ratna (PW 3) is the person who had set the entire machinery into process. It was he who first of all informed the victim's widow and CW 2 Mohan about the incident and the dying declaration made before him by Ladu. It was on his information and it was again he who took all other witnesses to the place where Ladu was lying in a severely wounded condition. The learned Sessions Judge accepted the testimony of this witness as true and reliable. On a careful scrutiny of what he testified, we find no reasons to distrust him and what he testified oh oath in respect of the dying declaration. He does not belong to the caste of the accused or the deceased. Even if the evidence of the other witnesses in respect of the dying declarations is excluded, the testimony of this witness Ratna (PW 3) in itself is so strong and formidable that it is sufficient to seek the conviction of the appellants. 12. PW 1 Harilal, PW 6 Smt. Kani and CW 2 Mohan deposed that on learning from Ratna Kahar (PW 3), they arranged a bullock-cart and went with Ratna to the place where Ladu was lying in an injured condition. Ladu was alive. He told them that Shanker and the appellants Chhittar, Soni, Duda, Bhera, Lala, Babu and Lal Mohammed made an assault on him with sword, axe, Farshi and lathis and struck blows to him. He also told them that he was first assaulted in the field of a Musalman and thereafter where he was found lying. The witnesses further stated that Ladu had multiple; wounds over his body and blood was oozing out from them. He also told them that he was first assaulted in the field of a Musalman and thereafter where he was found lying. The witnesses further stated that Ladu had multiple; wounds over his body and blood was oozing out from them. They, placed him in the bullock-cart and started towards the hospital, but before they could reach the hospital, Ladu did not survive and breathed his last. 13. It is true that these three witnesses are the close relatives of the deceased. But that alone cannot be treated to be a sound reason to distrust what they testified. The accused assigned no reasons as to why these three witnesses were speaking against them. The appellants pleaded no enmity, illrelations, inimical terms etc., which prompted these three witnesses to speak against them and introduce a false dying declaration. It is true that since they are the close relatives of the deceased-victim, a cautious approach is required in evaluating their evidence. Their evidence should be closely and carefully scrutinized. Admittedly, no bad-blood was there between the deceased-victim and the appellants, and also between these witnesses and the appellants. It is, therefore, difficult to agree with the learned counsel for the appellants, that these three witnesses have introduced false dying declarations. 14. Our attention was drawn to the statement of PW 9 Chhittar Lal Kalal, who, admittedly, went with PW 1 Harilal etc. to the place where Ladu was lying in an injured condition. He did not support the prosecution version that Ladu made any dying declaration in his presence. He was declared hostile. Despite his hostile attitude, he has the goodness to admit that when he and the other persons reached the spot where Ladu was lying in an injured condition, Ladu was alive and asked for water. He did not deny that Ladu Gujjar made any dying declaration. What he stated is that he had no knowledge whether the deceased Ladu stated as to who had belaboured him. To quote him in his own words " eq>s ;g /;ku ugha fd ykMw xqtZj us bl ckjs esa dgk Fk ;k ugha fd mlds pksVsa fdlus igqapkbZA " It appears that he adopted a neutral attiutude and, therefore, stated nothing in favour of or against the prosecution and expressed his ignorance. He did not state that Ladu was not alive or was not able to speak. He did not state that Ladu was not alive or was not able to speak. Had he stated that Ladu was already dead or was not able to speak, the matter might have been otherwise and assumed some other shape. However, when Ladu was alive even according to this witness and was able to speak, it cannot be said that Ladu made no dying declaration before Harilal, Smt. Kani, Mohan and Ratna. Otherwise too, it is quite natural that when Ladu was alive, he would make a declaration as to who had assaulted and belaboured him. As such, the hostile attitude of PW 9 Chhittar does not affect the crediblity of the dying declarations made by Ladu before Ratna, Mohan, Harilal and Smt. Kani. 15. CW 1 Balu lent no support to the prosecution. According to prosecution, when Ratna (PW 3) went to the deceased Ladu where he was lying in an injured condition, this witness Balu (CW 1) also came there. Balu adopted a neutral attitude and denied that he ever went to the injured Ladu or Ladu made any dying declaration before him. His neutral attitude does not adversely affect the evidence of the other witnesses relating to the dying declarations. 16. DW 3 Shrawan and DW 4 Uda were cited as witnesses in the Calendar of Witnesses filed by the prosecution with the charge-sheet. According to these witnesses, they were sleeping in the field of Kishna Mali (where the second part of the incident with the deceased had taken place) in the noon on the day of the incident. Ladu came and awoke them and told them that he was belaboured by his enemies. He requested them to take him to Shah-pura. Ladu sat down with them. At that very time, three persons from some distance, whom they could not identify, were coming. Ladu told them to immediately run away otherwise the miscreants would also kill them. It was contended by the learned counsel that the deceased did not disclose the names of his assailants nor could these witnesses identify those three persons whom they saw at some distance. It was argued that these infirmities clearly show that the dying declarations were later on manufactured and falsely introduced. We find no merit in the contention of the learned counsel. Ladu was assaulted and belaboured at two places-one at the place shown in the site plan Ex. It was argued that these infirmities clearly show that the dying declarations were later on manufactured and falsely introduced. We find no merit in the contention of the learned counsel. Ladu was assaulted and belaboured at two places-one at the place shown in the site plan Ex. P 17 on the bank of a Nallaha where there must the field of some Musalman and the other at the place shown in Ex. P 10 near the field of Kishna Mali. Ladu came in contact with these witnesses before the second incident took place with him. These two witnesses have stated that Ladu had injuries over his body. It appears that before Ladu could talk in some details with these witnesses, some persons were seen at some distance. He, therefore, advised these witnesses to run away to save themselves. These witnesses came in contact with Ladu after the first part of the assault. These witnesses, even according to them, ran away before Ladu could disclose any name to them. The evidence of these two defence witnesses is, in no way, hostile to the prosecution and does not destroy the evidence in respect of the dying declarations. 17. It was also contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that the deceased Ladu, after receiving multiple injuries over his body, could not remain physically and mentally fit to make any declaration as to who had assaulted and belaboured him. As such, the evidence of PW 1 Harilal, PW 3 Ratna, PW 6 Smt. Kani and CW 2 Mohan becomes highly doubtful. It is true that if the physical and mental condition of the deceased Ladu got completely impaired, he could not be in a state to make any declaration. But in the instant case, these witnesses were not at all, cross-examined to say that the decesed, on account of numerous injuries over his body, was not in a fit condition to make any declaration. No question was put to them on this point nor was any suggestion put to them. PW 9 Chhittar Lal, who turned hostile, also had the goodness to admit that when he along with these witnesses went to the spot where Ladu was lying in an injured condition, he found him alive. Ladu asked for water, which was provided to him and he drank it. PW 9 Chhittar Lal, who turned hostile, also had the goodness to admit that when he along with these witnesses went to the spot where Ladu was lying in an injured condition, he found him alive. Ladu asked for water, which was provided to him and he drank it. He further admitted that Ladu stated something to these witnesses, but he could not recollect as to what he staged. As such, even according to this hostile witness PW 9 Chhittar Lal, the deceased Ladu was in a fit condition both physical and mental to make the statement. 18. PW 8 Dr. Deo Narain, who conducted the medico legal autopsy on the victim's dead body, stated that no individual injury inflicted to the deceased was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death. He further stated that the death was caused due to the excessive flow of blood from the injuries. He was not at all cross-examined by the defence to show that on the infliction of the injuries, the victim was not a position to make any statement. We have also examined the injuries found over the victim's dead body. None was on his vital part like head. It was the bounden duty of the appellants to have pointedly put question to the doctor to elicit his opinion whether the deceased, after the infliction of the injuries over his body, was in a condition to make any statement or not ? For the reasons discussed above, we find no substance in the contention of the learned counsel that the witnesses have falsely introduced the dying declarations and that the deceased was not in mentally and physically fit condition to make the statement before his death. The learned Sessions Judge has accepted the evidence of PW 1 Harilal, PW 3 Ratna, PW 6 Smt. Kani and CW 2 Mohan trustworthy. On a close and careful scrutiny of what they testified on oath, we are unable to take a view different from that taken by the Sessions Judge about the deceased's making the dying declarations. The dying declarations have not been falsely introduced by these witnesses. We have already stated that if the veracity and truthfulness of the witnesses speaking about the dying declaration are not open to any doubt, the dying declaration is sufficient to seek the conviction of the accused. 19. The dying declarations have not been falsely introduced by these witnesses. We have already stated that if the veracity and truthfulness of the witnesses speaking about the dying declaration are not open to any doubt, the dying declaration is sufficient to seek the conviction of the accused. 19. There is yet another interesting feature of the case. No where it has been alleged by the accused nor was it suggested to the witnesses in their cross-examination that the deceased-victim Ladu had any ill will against them or that he was on inimical terms with them. It is, therefore, beyond our com-prehen sion that Ladu would make a false declaration against the appellants. 20. It was next contended that no motive has been alleged by the prosecution which prompted or incited the appellants to cause the death of the victim. It has not been suggested that the appellants were on inimical terms with the decased Ladu. Nor has it been suggested that they had any ill-will against him. The prosecution has not explained as to how the incident started in which the deceased was assaulted and belaboured. None of the injuries found over the victim's dead body was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death according to PW 8 Dr. Deo Narain. No injury was inflicted on the vital part of the victim's dead body. It was argued that, in these circumstances the offence made out should not be taken to be that of culpable homicide amounting to murder under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. The offence made out, according to the learned counsel, does not travel beyond the Second Part of Section 304, Indian Penal Code. It was on the other hand, contended by the learned Public Prosecutor the numerous injuries were inflicted to the deceased-victim, who died on account of the injuries within two-three hours. The injuries were collectively sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. When the commission of the offence stands proved, there is no obligation on the prosecution to prove the motive. We have taken the respective submission into consideration. 21. The striking feature in the case is that no motive-good, bad or indifferent, has been alleged by the prosecution. PW 1 Hari Lal and CW 2 Mohan are the real brothers while PW 6 Smt. Kani is the widow of the deceased-victim. We have taken the respective submission into consideration. 21. The striking feature in the case is that no motive-good, bad or indifferent, has been alleged by the prosecution. PW 1 Hari Lal and CW 2 Mohan are the real brothers while PW 6 Smt. Kani is the widow of the deceased-victim. None of them stated that there was any bad-blood between the appellants and the deceased Ladu. It is also astounding that the appellants have also not stated that the deceased was no inimical terms with them. Ladu, in his dying declarations, did not state as to why he was assaulted and belaboured. He also did not state as to how the incident started. The genesis of the occurrence is, thus, not known. It may be that when the deceased went with his live-stock for grazing, the cattle had stranded into the fields of the appellants. But that is only a guess work without any material. No injury to the victim was inflicted on the vital part of his body. None of the injuries was individually sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. We are, therefore, unable to say that the appellants had any intention to commit his murder. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the offence of culpable homicide amounting to murder is not made out. How ever in as much as death has been caused, the case must come atleast within the Second Part of Section 304, Indian Penal Code because the knowledge can be safely attributed to the accused. The offence committed by the accused, therefore, falls under Section 304, Part-II, Indian Penal Code as the act was done with the knowledge that it is likely to cause death but without, any intention to cause death or to cause such-bodily injury as is likely to cause death. 22. In the result, the appeals of accused Chhittar, Duda Soni alias Sonnath, Lalu s/o Bhoora Gujjar, Bhera, Lala alias Lal Mohammed s/o Safi Mohammed Musalman and' Babu are partly allowed. Their conviction under Section 302/149, Indian Penal Code and the sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to them, are set-aside. They are, however, convicted under the Second Part of Section 304/149, Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment. Their conviction and sentence under Section 147, Indian Penal Code are maintained. Sentences shall run concurrently. They are, however, convicted under the Second Part of Section 304/149, Indian Penal Code and each of them is sentenced to five years' rigorous imprisonment. Their conviction and sentence under Section 147, Indian Penal Code are maintained. Sentences shall run concurrently. The accused were on bail during the pendency of the appeals and are not present today. They are directed to surreder before the learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara within a month from today to serve out the unexpired portion of their sentences, if their remains any, failing which the learned Sessions Judge will get them arrested and send them to prison for the aforesaid purpose. The period of detention undergone by them during investigation, inquiry and trial shall be sett-off against the term of imprisonment imposed on them. 23. The appeals shall stand accordingly disposed of.Appeal partly allowed. *******