ORDER 1. There are five appellants, namely, original accused A-l to A-5. They were tried for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148 and 302 read with Section 149 IPC. The trial court convicted A-l and A-3 under Section 302 read with Section 34 and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. Rest were acquitted. The convicted accused and the State preferred appeals. The High Court while confirming the sentence of A-l and A-3 set aside the acquittal of accused A-2, A-4 and A-5 and convicted them and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. Hence the present appeal. 2. All the accused, the material witnesses and the deceased belong to Morapur Village within the limits of Mahalingapur police station. A-l to A-3 are brothers. A-4 and A-5 and two other absconding accused are their associates. There was enmity between A-l to A-3 and the deceased because of the illicit relations between the sister of A- 1 and the deceased. On 22-10-1979, at about 8.00 a.m. the deceased went to the house of PW 4 - barber to have a shave but was asked to come later. In the meanwhile, PWs 5 to 7 went to have shave and Gulappa - the deceased also again went there. Since the deceased was the first person as having coming earlier, he was given preference by PW 4 and he started shaving. At that juncture, A-l entered with an axe in his hand and dealt a blow on the right shoulder of the deceased who had bent his head towards PW 4 as PW 4 was shaving his beard. A-2 also came there. The deceased, however, caught hold of the handle of the chopper in the hand of A- l. A-1 asked A-2 to call others. A-2 whistled and on hearing whistle A-4 and one of the absconding accused appeared there. A-2 and A-4 both had sickles. On seeing them, the deceased ran out of the barbers hut. Then he was chased by accused A- 1, A-2 and A-4. This was also witnessed by PWs 4 to 7. Thereafter, accused A- l, A-2 and A-4 and absconding accused attacked with their respective weapons. By that time, accused A-3 and A-5 and the other absconding accused, Ravajappa came there running from the direction of their houses. Ravajappa and A-5 pelted stones on the deceased. This was also witnessed by PWs 4 to 7. Thereafter, accused A- l, A-2 and A-4 and absconding accused attacked with their respective weapons. By that time, accused A-3 and A-5 and the other absconding accused, Ravajappa came there running from the direction of their houses. Ravajappa and A-5 pelted stones on the deceased. Then the deceased was caught hold of by accused A- l, A-2 and A-5 and the absconding accused inflicted injuries on the deceased with axe and sickles and thereafter ran away leaving the deceased dead. PW 4 ran to the house of PW 10, the Dalapati of the village and orally told him about the incident. PW 10 went to the spot and then he went to the police station and got a report written by some document writer and presented Ex. P-4 in the police station. PW 19, the Police Officer registered the FIR. The inquest was held on the dead body and the same was sent for post-mortem. The doctor, who conducted the post-mortem, found as many as 17 injuries. Most of them were incised wounds cutting the vital organs and the doctor opined that the death was due to these injuries. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet was laid. The prosecution relied upon the evidence of PWs 4 to 19, out of them some are ladies in the neighbourhood. 3. The learned trial Judge relying on Ex. P-7, namely, the FIR acquitted accused A-2, A-4 and A-5 on the ground that their names were not mentioned therein and convicted accused A-l and A-3 holding that their names were mentioned in the FIR. The High Court on the other hand having examined PWs 4 to 10 and the findings of the trial court held that there are independent witnesses and even if all the details were not given in the FIR, it does not affect their evidence. In that view, the High Court convicted the five respondents who faced the trial. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that A-3 did not play any part at all and the names of accused A-2, A-4 and A-5 were not mentioned in the report which was based on the oral information and therefore conviction cannot be sustained at all. 5. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that A-3 did not play any part at all and the names of accused A-2, A-4 and A-5 were not mentioned in the report which was based on the oral information and therefore conviction cannot be sustained at all. 5. No doubt the FIR is an important document but that by itself cannot be the basis to decide the culpability of the assailants in every case. In the instant case, the incident just happened in the morning in the shop of PW 4 - the barber and PWs 5, 6 and 7 were present as customers and PWs 8 and 9 were in the neighbourhood. Both PWs 8 and 9 also deposed that accused A-l, A-2 and A-4 inflicted injuries with axe and sickles respectively. To that extent we do not find any ground to doubt their veracity. So far as accused A-3 and A-5 are concerned, there is vague allegation and they were also running along with the other accused A-l pelting stones. It is not safe to convict accused A-3 and A-5 by applying Section 149 IPC. Accordingly, we confirm the convictions of accused A-l, A-2 and A-4 under Sections 302/149 IPC and sentence of imprisonment of life awarded thereunder. The conviction of A-3 and A-5 under Sections 302/149 IPC and the sentence of imprisonment of life awarded thereunder are, however, set aside and they are acquitted of all the charges. The appeal is accordingly partly allowed. For Citation : 1994 Supp (3) SCC 332