D. K. TRIVEDI, J. The above mentioned two appeals arise out of the judgment and order, dated 22-2-1983 passed by Shri K. C. Agarwal, Ilnd Additional Sessions Judge, Bahraich, convicting the appellants under Section 395 I. P. C and sentencing each of them to imprisonment for a period of seven years. Both the appeals are, therefore, being disposed of by a common judgment. 2. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that a dacoity was committed in the night between 23/24- 1-1982 at the house of Bachchoo (P. W. 1), Jile Ram and Hardwari (P. W. 2) in village Muralipurwa hamlet of Pat hakpurwa Police Station Kharighat District Bahraich. It is said that (P. W. 1) Bachchoo was sleeping in the outer thatched Chaupal alongwith his grand sons and a lantern was burning in the Chaupal. Shanker son of Bachchoo and the ladies were sleeping inside the house. At about mid-night the dacoits caught hold of Bachchoo and started to enquire from him about the valuables. Some of the dacoits entered inside the house. Shanker tried to apprehend one of the dacoits whereupon it is alleged that the said dacoit fired a shot at Shanker with a country made pistol causing injuries to him. Bachchoo and others raised alarm and on hearing the alarm several persons of the village reached there with torches and one Hari Lal set fire to the heap of Phoos which was lying towards north of the Ghari of Bachchoo. It is alleged that the witnesses saw the faces of the dacoits in the light produced by the burning of the Phoos as well as torch and lantern light. It is also alleged that after looting the house of Bachchoo, the dacoits also looted the house of Hardwari and Jile Ram. After committing dacoity the ran away. In the next morning Bachchoo took all the injured persons to Police Station Khairighat and lodged a written report (Ext. Ka. 1) at Police Station Khairighat at 10. 10 a. m. On the basis of said written report P. W. 12 Ishwar Nath Shukla Head Moharrir prepared chik report Ext. Ka 12 registered a case in the G. D. Ext. Ka 13. The injured persons were sent to the State Dispensary Nanpara for their medical examination through Constable Ram Shanker Panday. In the caid P. H. C. they were medically examined and injury reports were prepared. Ka 12 registered a case in the G. D. Ext. Ka 13. The injured persons were sent to the State Dispensary Nanpara for their medical examination through Constable Ram Shanker Panday. In the caid P. H. C. they were medically examined and injury reports were prepared. (P. W. 9) S. I. Jagat Narain Misra in whose presence the First Information Report was lodged, started investigation in this case and he at once proceeded to the village of the occurrence and recorded the statements of the witnesses. He also prepared site plan (Ext. Ka 6) and took sample of ash of the burnt Phoos and also collected blood stained and plain earth. He also inspected the torches and prepared Fard. Sub sequently, S. I. Yashwant Singh (P. W. 7) S. O. Police Station Khairighat took over investiga tion and after completing the same submitted charge-sheet against the accused persons. 3. The accused persons were arrested by S. L R. K. Mehta (P. W. 6) on 9-2-1981 and 13-2-1982. The accused persons were not named and, therefore, they were put up for identification in District Jail on 8- 3-1982. The identification parade was conducted by Shri B. B. Srivastava (P. W. 11) Tbhsildar/executive Magistrate, Bahraich. Siddiq appellant was identified by four persons out of them (P. W. 3) Hardwari, (P. W. 4) Gobrey and (P. W. 5) Sallar have been examined. Baboo appellant was identified by all the five witnesses namely (P. W 1) Bachchoo, (P. W. 2) Hari Lal, (P. W. 3) Hardwari, (P. W. 4) Gobrey and (P. W. 5) Sallar. Tbj Pal Singh appellant was identified by two witnesses namely (P. W. 3) Hardwari and (P. W. 5) Sallar. Appellant Ramzan was correctly identified by Hari Lal (P. W. 2), Hardwari (P. W. 3) and Sallar (P. W. 5) Similarly, appellant Gajjoo was identified by Hari Lal (P. W. 2) and Hardwari (P. W. 3 ). 4. The prosecution, in support of its case, examined 12 witnesses. Out of them P. Ws. 1 to 5 are witnesses of fact. (P. W 6) S. I. R. K. Mehta arrested the accused persons in this case and (P. W. 7) S. I. Yashwant Singh another Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet in this case. (P. W. 8) Constable Bhanu Pratap Singh and Constable Arjun Singh (P. W. 10) brought the accused persons in Bapardah condition. 1 to 5 are witnesses of fact. (P. W 6) S. I. R. K. Mehta arrested the accused persons in this case and (P. W. 7) S. I. Yashwant Singh another Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet in this case. (P. W. 8) Constable Bhanu Pratap Singh and Constable Arjun Singh (P. W. 10) brought the accused persons in Bapardah condition. (P. W. 9) S. I. Jagat Narain Misra conducted the initial investigation in this case. (P. W. 11) Sri B. B. Srivastava Tkhsildar/ex-ecutive Magistrate, Bahraich conducted identification of the accused persons and proved the identification memo. (P. W. 12) Head Constable Ishwar Nath Shukla had prephred chik report and other, relevant entries in the G. D. 5. On the other hand, the accused persons denied the prosecution and stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case. Appellant Siddiq in his statement under Section 313 Cr. PC. stated that he is Nai (barber) by caste and is resident of village Chikhari Dhandhar Police Station Rampur Mathura District Sitapur. He further stated that he came to village Bela Makan Police Station Khairighat at the house of one Sunder Singh on the invitation of Sunder Singh for the Mundan ceremony which was going to be performed at the house of Balkaran Singh of his village. He further alleged that residents of village Bela Makan had enmity with Sunder Singh and, therefore, he was falsely implicated in this case. 6. On the other hand Baboo Singh, Tfcj Pal Singh, Ramzan and Gajjoo have stated that they had their agricultural land in the village of the dacoity and they reside in the said village prior to this incident and, therefore, the witnesses were known to them. In support of their contention the above mentioned four appellants filed several papers, Ext. Kha-1 to Kha-II showing that they have their fields and houses in village Pathakpurwa. 7. The learned Sessions Judge, after considering the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the prosecution has successfully proved the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt and, therefore, he convicted the appellants and sentenced each of them as mentioned above. 8. The appellants aggrieved by the said judgment and order filed the present ap peals - and challenged the conviction and sentence. Criminal Appeal No. 482 of 1983 was filed by Siddiq from Jail. 8. The appellants aggrieved by the said judgment and order filed the present ap peals - and challenged the conviction and sentence. Criminal Appeal No. 482 of 1983 was filed by Siddiq from Jail. As the appeal was filed from Jail by Siddiq appellant, hence this Court appointed Shri Siddharth Verma Advocate as Amicus Curie. Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 1983 was filed by four of the appellants namely Baboo Singh, Tbj Pal Singh Ramzan and Gajioo through their Counsel Shri Imtiaz Murtaza. 9. I have heard the learned Counsel for the appellants as well as the State Counsel and perused the record. 10. In the instant case, the factum of dacoity is not challenged. The only dispute is as to whether the appellants have participated in the said dacoity or not. As regards appel lants Baboo Singh, Tfej Pal Singh, Ramzan and Gajjoo are concerned, they have specifically stated that they have been falsely implicated in this case and they were known to the witnesses from before. In support of their contention they have filed several papers in defence. Ext. Kha-1 and Kha-2 are the copies of bail orders regarding accused appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 1983 showing that they have been released on bail on the ground that their fields were found in the village of the occurrence. Ext. Kha-3 to Kha-5 show that Baboo Singh, Tfcj Pal Singh, Ramzan and Gajjoo appellants were in possession of the land as trespassers and they were shown in possession since 1388 Fasli. Ext. Kha-6 is the receipt of cattle pound showing that appellant Baboo Singh had impounded the cattle of Bachchoo in the cattlepound. Ext. Kha- 7, Kha-8, Kha-9 and Kha-10 are the copies of Pariwar Register showing that the appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 1983 had their houses and they are residents of village Pathakpurwa. Ext. Kha-11 is the Khetauni of 1385 to 1394 Fasli showing that Baboo Singh was found in possession over plot in dispute from 1388 Fasli. These documents clearly show that the appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 1983 had their cultivation and were found in possession as trespasser over the land in dispute since 1388 Fasli. The incident took place in the year 1982. tn these circumstances, these documents clearly support the contention of the appellants that they were known to the witnesses from before. The incident took place in the year 1982. tn these circumstances, these documents clearly support the contention of the appellants that they were known to the witnesses from before. The learned Sessions Judge, after considering these documents discarded them on the ground that these documents are not genuine documents and further it appears that the accused persons had been making plans from the very beginning to commit dacoity in this village and for this purpose they fabricated these documents. It is surprising how to learned Sessions Judge made such an observation in his judgment. There is nothing on the record to show that these papers are forged one or have been fabricated by the accused persons. If the learned Sessions Judge had any doubt, then he should have summoned the Lekhpal or the Tkhsildar and would have got them verified from them. In the absence of any evidence, it was not proper on the part of the Sessions Judge to have discarded these papers on the ground that these papers were fabricated by the accusec persons because they had been making plans to commit dacoity. 11. Thus, in view of the overwhelming documentary evidence filed by the defence, ii my opinion, it is proved that the accused persons were known to the witnesses from before 12. As regards appellant Siddiq is concerned he was identified by three persons Siddiq appellant has stated that he is a resident of village Chikhari Dhandhar Polio Station Rampur Mathura District Sitapur, and, therefore, it is not possible for the wit nesses to have known him from before. He further stated that he had come to village Bel Makan,. Police Station Khairighat on the invitation of Sunder Singh who was relative Balkaran Singh. However, neither Sunder Singh nor Balkaran Singh was examined in support of the defence case. There is no evidence to show that he had any connection with Sunder Singh or Balkaran Singh. There is nothing on record to show that he was invited by Sunder Singh for the Mundan ceremony at the house of Balkaran Singh. Siddiq appellant was correctly identified by three persons whose identification can not be discarded. There is no evidence to show that he had any connection with Sunder Singh or Balkaran Singh. There is nothing on record to show that he was invited by Sunder Singh for the Mundan ceremony at the house of Balkaran Singh. Siddiq appellant was correctly identified by three persons whose identification can not be discarded. In these circumstances the guilt of Siddiq appellant is proved beyond reasonable doubt and as such the appeal preferred by Siddiq appellant i. e. , Criminal Appeal No. 482 of 1983 is dismissed and the conviction and sentence awarded to him is hereby confirmed He is in Jail and is directed to serve out the sentence. 13. As regards Criminal Appeal No. 125 of 1983 preferred by Baboo, Tfej Pal Singh, Ramzan and Gajjoo appellants is concerned the same is allowed and the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants Baboo, Tfej Pal Singh, Ramzan and Gajjoo is hereby set aside. They are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds are hereby cancelled and sureties discharged. Appeal allowed. .