S. K. MOOKERJI, J. ( 1 ) THIS is an appeal filed by Pratap Singh and Neksa against the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, Mathura, dated 26. 7. 1979, in Sessions Trial No. 69 of 1979, convicting appellant Pratap Singh under section 302, I. P. C. and appellant Neksa under section 323, I. P. C. and sentencing them to life imprisonment and R. I. for a period of six months respectively. Appellant Pratap Singh has been convicted under section 302, I. P. C. for committing the murder of dal Chand and appellant Neksa was held guilty under section 323, IPC for causing simple hurt to ramesh Chandra. ( 2 ) THE appellants Pratap Singh and Neksa are real brothers. The deceased Dal Chand also lived in the same village Bedai where appellants Pratap Singh and Neksa were residing. P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra, who lodged the first information report and is also an injured witness, is the son of the deceased Dal Chand. ( 3 ) BEFORE entering into the facts of the case it is necessary to point out that there are three eye - witnesses in the case, namely, P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma, P. W. 3 Chura Man and P. W. 4 Asharfi Lal. P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma had lodged the First Information Report and has also sustained simple injuries. In the first information report names of P. Ws. 3 Chura Man and P. W. 4 Asharfi Lal have been mentioned. There are some formal witnesses in the case, namely, P. W. 2 Ram Pal Singh Head Moharrir, who prepared the chick report, P. W. 5 Dr. Arvind Kumar, who performed the post mortem examination on the body of the deceased Dal Chand, P. W. 6 Dr. D. D. Bansal, who had examined the injuries sustained by P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma and P. W. 7 Dinesh Chand Misra, who is Investigating Officer in the case. ( 4 ) IN the present case the defence has also examined two persons, namely, D. W. 1 Nekas, who has been convicted under section 323, I. P. C. by the court below and D. W. 2 Tikam Singh, who has disclosed the defence story. ( 4 ) IN the present case the defence has also examined two persons, namely, D. W. 1 Nekas, who has been convicted under section 323, I. P. C. by the court below and D. W. 2 Tikam Singh, who has disclosed the defence story. ( 5 ) THE facts of the case, in brief, is that the Nohra (Gher) of the appellants Pratap Singh and Neksa is situated in front of the Nohra (Gher) of the deceased Dal Chand and there is a passage in between the two Nohras. The appellants had constructed a Ladawani here in after referred to as cattle trough, just adjacent to the Nohra of the deceased Dal Chand and P. W. I Ramesh Chandra Sharma. According to the prosecution case the above cattle though was constructed by the appellants recently although the defence case was that it was an old cattle through, which existed since long. According to the case of precautions on 22. 11. 1978 at about 5. 30 p. m. in village Redia the occurrence has taken place while the Bhainsa (buffalo) of the appellants was tied in the said cattle trough. The she buffalo of the deceased Dal Chand got freed and reached at that place so that the Bhainsa of the accused knocked down the she buffalo of the deceased Dal Chand and P. W. I Ramesh Chandra Sharma, as a result of which the she-buffalo fell down. It is further disclosed that the complainant P. W. I Ramesh Chandra Sharma therefore, tried the Bhainsa of the appellants and took it to the Gher of the accused and tied it there and further dismantled (damaged) the cattle trough of the appellants. This happened at about noon. At about 5. 30 p. m. the appellants Pratap Singh and Neksa arrived there with lathis and started abusing and inquired from the deceased Dal Chand and his sons Ramesh Chandra and Raj Pal, who were present there, as to why they have demolished their cattle trough and why they had tied their Bhainsa inside the gher. Thereafter the deceased Dal Chand and his sons asked the appellants to stop abusing, whereupon, accused Pratap Singh started assaulting Dal Chand with lathi and also gave HUDA blows to the deceased Dal Chand with lathi. Thereafter the deceased Dal Chand and his sons asked the appellants to stop abusing, whereupon, accused Pratap Singh started assaulting Dal Chand with lathi and also gave HUDA blows to the deceased Dal Chand with lathi. When P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma went to the rescue of his father, Dal Chand, the appellant Neksa assaulted him causing simple injuries. Thereafter, accused persons ran away. However, Dal Chand expired the spot. Besides, P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma, this occurrence was also witnessed by P. W. 3 Chura Man and P. W. 4 Asharfi Lal. ( 6 ) AFTER keeping the dead body of the deceased, Dal Chand on Charpai P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma prepared a written report (Ex. Ka 1) and thereafter went to the Police - station Sadabad. , which was at a distance of about 4 miles, and lodged the same at about 6. 30 P. M. Thus, the report was lodged promptly and the case was registered and investigation was undertaken by P. W. 7 D. C. Misra, S. I. The accused persons were ultimately arrested from their house on 8. 12. 1978 and on the same day the Investigating officer submitted charge-sheet (Ext. Ka-14) after following the procedure proscribed in accordance with law. ( 7 ) THE post mortem examination on the body of the deceased, Dal Chand was conducted by Dr. Arvind Kumar on 23. 11. 1978 at 4 p. m. He found that the deceased was an old man aged about 64 years and was of average built and had died about one day back. He found following injuries on his person:1. Lacerated wound 2 cm. x 1 cm. x bone deer or the back of head and lies 3 cm. behind the tuft of the hair. 2. Lacerated wound 1 cm. x 1 cm. x bone deep on the left side back of the head and lies 10 cm. behind the left ear. 3. Abraided contusion 6cm. x 5cm. on the right side front of the head and lies 5 cm. above the right ear. 4. Two abraided contusions 2 cm. x 1/2 cm. and 1 cm. x 1 cm. lying one cm. apart on the back and neck at the level of 7th circle vertebrae. 5. Abraided contusion in an area of 10 cm. x 6 cm. on the right side front of the head and lies 5 cm. above the right ear. 4. Two abraided contusions 2 cm. x 1/2 cm. and 1 cm. x 1 cm. lying one cm. apart on the back and neck at the level of 7th circle vertebrae. 5. Abraided contusion in an area of 10 cm. x 6 cm. on the left side front of the middle of the chest, and lies 6 cm. below the left nipple. Internal examination revealed that under the scalp a thick clotted blood layer in an area of 4 cm. x 4 cm. x 5 cm. was present under injury No. 3. Right frontal and temporal bones were fractured under injury No. 3. Membranes were congested and brain was also congested. Left side 6th rib was fractured under injury No. 5. Left pleura was lacerated under injury No. 5 pleural cavity contained I lb. of blood. Left lung lower lobe lacerated under injury No. 5. The stomach contained watery brownish fluid about 3 on small intestine was full with usual contents and gases. Faucal matter was present in the large intestines. Bladder was empty. In the opinion of the doctor death was due to coma as a result of head injury (vide post mortem report Ex. K-5 ). ( 8 ) P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma, informant, who had sustained injuries was sent from the police-station to Sadabad P. H. C. Dispensary, where his injuries were examined by Dr. D. D. Bansal (P. W. 6) on the night of 22. 11. 1978 at about 7. 30 P. M. following injuries were found on his person:1. Contusion 8 cm. x 2 cm. on left back 12 cm. back and medial from left shoulder. 2. Multiple abrasions in the area 3 cm. x 1. 5 cm. on left side neck 10 cm. below from left ear. 3. Contusion 4 cm. x 1. 5 on back of left wrist joint. 4. Contusion 5 cm. x 3 cm on left calf muscles 10 cm. above from left ankle joint. 5. Complaint of pain over right foot. No external mark of injury. The injuries were simple and caused by blunt object and friction and were fresh, vide injury report (Ex. Ka-6 ). x 1. 5 on back of left wrist joint. 4. Contusion 5 cm. x 3 cm on left calf muscles 10 cm. above from left ankle joint. 5. Complaint of pain over right foot. No external mark of injury. The injuries were simple and caused by blunt object and friction and were fresh, vide injury report (Ex. Ka-6 ). ( 9 ) BEFORE discussing the evidence on record we are inclined to observe that the judgment of the court below is well written and fully discussed and the finding of fact arrived at by the Court below are just and proper and we are in full agreement with the same. It will be relevant to point out that both the accused persons pleaded not guilty. It is also not denied that the occurrence did take place at the time and place indicated by the prosecution and that lathi blows were given to the deceased Dal Chand and Ramesh Chandra Sharma and Dal Chand had died on the spot. The appellants have attempted to set up a case of self defence. The court below has rejected the defence case based on plea of self defence. We are fully in agreement with the court below on this point. It will be relevant to notice that the defence case is doubtful and stand falsified because although the occurrence has been admitted but no first information report was lodged by the appellants. The appellants did not suffer any lathi injury and under the defence has also failed to illicit anything in their favour by cross examining the prosecution witnesses. According to the prosecution case accused Pratap Singh had assaulted and given a fatal blow to Dal Chand where accused Neksa has caused simple injuries to P. W. I Ramesh Chandra Sharma. From the evidence on record it is clear that the appellant Pratap Singh was aggressor and there is nothing on record to show that either Dal Chand or his son P. W. I Ramesh Chandra Sharma caused any injury. It is also clear from the evidence on record that the cattle trough was dismantled sometimes in the noon when the Bhainsa of the appellants had attacked the she - buffalo of the complainant. It is also clear from the evidence on record that the cattle trough was dismantled sometimes in the noon when the Bhainsa of the appellants had attacked the she - buffalo of the complainant. The real marpit has taken place at least after a lapse of S hours at S. 30 p. m. Thus, it cannot be said that there was any grave and sudden provocations in the case. From the reading of the evidence on record it is clear that the first information report was lodged by P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma promptly and without least delay. All material details are contained in the first information report. P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma has been examined in this case. He is injured witness and he had lodged the written first information report regarding the murder of his father Dal Chand and also regarding the injuries sustained by him. He has fully supported the prosecution case and his statement is fully corroborated not only by the first information report but also by the post mortem examination report and injury report. Further his statement has been supported by P. W. 3 Chura Man and P. W. 4 Asharfi Lal. All the eye-witnesses were cross-examined at length but nothing substantially could be scored by the defence. There is no proved enmity against P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma by which his evidence could be discarded. Further, the injuries sustained by him could not be said to be self -suffered or self inflicted and, therefore, we do not doubt his presence at the place of the occurrence. We do not find any reason in the evidence of P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma, P. W. 3 Chura Man and P. W. 4 Asharfi Lal for falsely implicating the accused persons in the present case. We are accepting the testimony of P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma and also other two eye-witnesses P. W. 3 Chura Man and P. W. 4 Asharfi Lal. Their evidence is sufficient to record conviction as indicated by the court below. The manner in which the occurrence took place has also been fully proved by the above named eye -witnesses. We are accepting the testimony of P. W. 1 Ramesh Chandra Sharma and also other two eye-witnesses P. W. 3 Chura Man and P. W. 4 Asharfi Lal. Their evidence is sufficient to record conviction as indicated by the court below. The manner in which the occurrence took place has also been fully proved by the above named eye -witnesses. In this case conviction can be recorded even on the sole testimony of P. W. I Ramesh Chandra Sharma, corroborated by the post mortem examination report, and injury report, P. W. I Ramesh Chandra Sharma is reliable witness and we accept his statement as correct for upholding the conviction of the appellants, as recorded by the court below. ( 10 ) THE case set up by the defence does not even appear to be probable and defence witness did not inspire any confidence. D. W. I Neksaisan accused and had given out a distorted version to escape the consequences of the prosecution. He did not lodge any report with the police nor ever sent any application to any authority giving the defence version of the occurrence or explaining the circumstances under which Dal Chand and Ramesh Chandra Sharma were assaulted. Thus, the defence version was set up for the first time in the court. For the reasons already recorded by the court below we reject the defence version and agree with the findings of the court below in rejecting the defence version. D. W. 2 Tikam Singh was admittedly related to the accused persons. His testimony has rightly been rejected by the court below. It is abundantly clear from the evidence on record that the appellant Pratap Singh assaulted Dal Chand and caused several injuries including three injuries on the head and these injuries were caused by very forceful blows of lathis so much so that the frontal and temporal bones were fractured and a rib was also fractured and death of Dal Chand was caused at the spot itself. It is also proved beyond any shadow of doubt that when Ramesh Chandra Sharma came to the rescue of his father, Dal Chand, the accused Neksa assaulted him and caused several injuries including contusions and abrasions, as pointed out above. It is also proved beyond any shadow of doubt that when Ramesh Chandra Sharma came to the rescue of his father, Dal Chand, the accused Neksa assaulted him and caused several injuries including contusions and abrasions, as pointed out above. We, therefore, uphold the conviction of the appellant Neksa under section 323, I. P. C. ( 11 ) AFTER hearing learned counsel for the parties and after examining the material on record we are of the opinion that the conviction of Pratap Singh under section 302, I. P. C. and Neksa under section 323, I. P. C. should be upheld. We, therefore, uphold the conviction of both the appellants Pratap Singh and Neksa under section 302, I. P. C. and 323, I. P. C. respectively, as recorded by the court below. On the question of sentence, the sentence of life imprisonment against the appellant Pratap Singh is maintained by us. Regarding the sentence of six months R. I. passed against appellant Neksa under section 323, I. P. C. by the court below it has been submitted that appellant Neksa was aged about 16 years as recorded in his statement under section 313, Cr. P. C. and he had already undergone almost two weeks of imprisonment. It was further submitted that the appellant Neksa had absolutely no motive to join the co-accused Pratap Singh in the assault on Dal Chand. He had, no doubt, caused injuries to the son of Lal Chand, P. W. I Ramesh Chandra Sharma, which were simple in nature. After considering the above argument we are of the opinion that the conviction of Neksa appellant is maintained under section 323, I. P. C. but his sentence of 6 months R. I. passed by the court below should be reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him. ( 12 ) IN the result, the appeal of Pratap Singh is dismissed and his conviction under section 302, I. P. C. is upheld and the sentence of life imprisonment there under awarded by the court below is maintained. He is on bail and, therefore, let him be taken into custody forthwith and sent to jail to serve out the sentence. The conviction of the appellant Neksa under section 323, I. P. C. is upheld. He is on bail and, therefore, let him be taken into custody forthwith and sent to jail to serve out the sentence. The conviction of the appellant Neksa under section 323, I. P. C. is upheld. The sentence of six months R. I. recorded by the court below under section 323, I. P. C. is hereby reduced to the period of imprisonment already undergone by him. He is on bail and, therefore, is not required to surrender. The sureties are discharged and bail bounds are hereby cancelled. Appeal dismissed except sentence of A2 modified. .