Judgment G.S.N. Tripathi, J. (1) The then IVth Addl. Sessions Judge, Varanasi convicted the accused Mittan alias Mita Ram and Panna on a charge under Section 147 I.P.C. and sentenced them to undergo 6 months' R.I. Accused Kashi, Ram Dhani, Badri and Algu were convicted on charge under Section 148, I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 2 years R.I. All the aforesaid six accused were further sentenced to undergo 5 years' R.I. on a charge under Section 307/149, I.P.C. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The aforesaid judgment was delivered in S.T. No. 193/78 of Distt. Varanasi, State vs. Mittan and others relating to P.S. Mirzamurad, Distt. Varanasi. (2) Prosecution case started on the basis of a written F.I.R. made by Kalloo Ram at P. S. Mirzamurad Distt. Varanasi on 2.5.76 at 12.15 p.m. The incident is said to have taken place in the night of 1/2.5.76 around midnight. The distance of the police station is 5 miles. The allegations in the F.I.R. are that in the night of occurrence, the complainant's brother, Panna Lal was going to his Khalihan when accused Mittan, Kashi, Panna, Ram Dhani, Badri and Algu, armed with lathis and spears, started assaulting him. Mittan and Panna had lathis. Others had spears. Hearing the alarm, Phundan, Ram Chandra and others arrived there flashing their torches. Thereafter, the accused retreated. Serious injuries had been received by the injured Panna Lal and his condition was serious. Therefore, he was lodged in Kabir Chaura Hospital. His condition continues to be serious and he is unconscious. A delay was caused in lodging the report. (3) On the basis of the written information conveyed by the complainant, chik and G.D. entries were made by Constable Prabhu Nath Singh, P.W. 7. Constable Ram Vilas Pandey, P.W. 6 was also present. It appears that the police did not take interest. Therefore, the complainant made an application to the S.S.P. on 10.5.76 and on his orders, the Investigation in the case took place. (4) The I.O. Sri S.P. Rawat started investigation effectively from 12.5.76 after the receipt of the order from the S.S.P. He went to the spot on 21.5.76 and recorded the statements of the witnesses and prepared the site-plan. On 15.6.76, the X-ray report and injury reports were received. He examined the torches of the witnesses on 5.11.76. Thus somehow or the other, the investigation was concluded and charge-sheet was submitted. On 15.6.76, the X-ray report and injury reports were received. He examined the torches of the witnesses on 5.11.76. Thus somehow or the other, the investigation was concluded and charge-sheet was submitted. The prosecution has examined P.W. 1 Panna Lal, the injured. He has deposed that the accused are inter-related amongst themselves and have formed a party. The aunt of Mittan, accused is Smt. Rajwanti. The accused and Smt. Rajwanti were litigating in the consolidation courts. Mittan had set up a false plea that Smt. Rajwanti was dead. But the complainant called Smt. Rajwanti from her father's place and got an objection filed by her and he was doing pairvi on her behalf against Mittan. On account of this enmity, the incident had occurred. Thereafter, he has described the manner in which the accused all of a sudden bounced upon him and caused injuries. He himself had a torch. Witnesses too had torches nay, the accused had also torches, which were flashed. The accused were known from before. They were identified on the spot. The witness lost his senses and became unconscious. He was shifted to Kabir Chaura Hospital for treatment. (5) P.W. 2 Punnan has deposed that in the night of occurrence, in the Khalihan of Khelawan, the accounts of Co-operative Society were being settled. There, apart from him, P.W. 1 Panna Lal, Ram Khelawan and Ram Chandra were also present. After the settlement of accounts, Panna started for his Khalihan, which is at a short distance from Khalihan of Ram Khelawan. Soon after his departure, Panna Lal started crying. This witness along with Ram Chandra, Khelawan, Gulab and others rushed towards the place of occurrence. They all had torches. There they saw the accused assaulting Panna Lal. Ram Dhani and Badri had spears. Others had lathis. Panna Lal was badly injured and became unconscious. He along with others, took the injured to Kabir Chaura Hospital. (6) P.W. 3, Kallo Ram, the complainant has given a similar statement. Additionally, he has said that he lodged the report after settling Panna Lal in the Hospital and giving proper medical aid to him. He is also an eye-witness of the occurrence. P.W. 4, Ram Chandra Singh has given a similar statement. He was the Accountant of the Co-operative Society. Additionally, he has said that he lodged the report after settling Panna Lal in the Hospital and giving proper medical aid to him. He is also an eye-witness of the occurrence. P.W. 4, Ram Chandra Singh has given a similar statement. He was the Accountant of the Co-operative Society. He has said that the settlement of accounts of Panna Lal, P.W. 1 concluded around 12 p.m. Thereafter, he went towards the Khalihan and within minutes thereafter, he started crying for help. Then he along with others, with torches arrived and saw the accused committing the crime. (7) Other evidence is formal in nature. For instance P.W. 6 Constable Ram Vilas Pandey and P.W. 7, Constable Prabhu Nath Singh has proved the G.D. entries. P.W. 9 Dr. Anil Kumar Rastogi has proved the Injury report of Panna Lal. P.W. 8 Dr. S. K. Gupta was a Radiologist in the Distt. Hospital. Varanasi. He has proved the X-ray report and the injury report and the plate. P.W. 5 S.P. Rawat, is the Investigating Officer. He has proved the investigation process from beginning till end. (8) Dr. Anil Kumar Rastogi had found three incised wounds on the person of Panna Lal, P.W. 1. They were caused by some sharp edged weapon, like spear. X-ray had been advised by him. Injury No. 1 caused on the chest could be dangerous to life and it was on the vital part of the body. Dr. S.K. Gupta, P.W. 8, a Radiologist had found haziness on the left lung of the injured. (9) A detailed description of the injury report and X-ray report has been made by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge in the body on his judgment. Therefore, I am not repeating the same. (10) The accused in their statements u/s 313, Cr. P.C. have generally denied the allegations and stated that on account of enmity, they have been falsely implicated. Accused Panna, s/o Bhurahu has additionally stated that there was a dispute between him and Puhnan with the allegation of some ghosts being operated by his family. A panchayat had been convened. But the other side did not abide by the decision of the Panchayat. In the night of the occurrence, Panna Lal, P.W. 1 Punnan, Khelawan and Kunnan were concealing behind the wall of the house of the accused and started abusing him at about 1 a.m. in the night. A panchayat had been convened. But the other side did not abide by the decision of the Panchayat. In the night of the occurrence, Panna Lal, P.W. 1 Punnan, Khelawan and Kunnan were concealing behind the wall of the house of the accused and started abusing him at about 1 a.m. in the night. When he asked him not to do so, these culprits assaulted him. Lalloo Sarpanch, Lalta and Kashi were also present. In order to save his life, he brought Khanti (a sharp cutting weapon used for digging earth) and wielded the same towards Panna Lal, P.W. 1 causing him injuries. Thereafter, the culprits retreated. The accused have examined Lalloo Shankar, D.W. 1, who has tried to support the version of the accused as noted above. (11) D.W. 2 Dr. Narsingh Upadhyaya medically examined Bhurahu on 2.5.76 at about 8 p.m. and found two traumatic swellings, one contusion and one complaint of pain on his body. At 8.15 p.m. on the same day, he had examined Smt. Phulpatti, wife of Panna accused and found three contusions and two traumatic swellings. At 8.30 p.m., he examined Panna, accused and found two contusions and two abrasions on his person. All the injuries of these three persons were found to be simple and caused by some blunt weapon like lathi. They had been occasioned in the night of 1/2.5.76. (12) The detailed description of the injuries of these persons are to be found in the Judgment of the learned trial court D.W. 3 Constable Sita Ram Lal has proved the FIR lodged by Ghurahu (Exhibit Kha-13) in which the version of the accused, as noted above finds place. It is also not disputed that on the basis of these allegations, a cross-case between the parties was contested and it has been rejected by the court below. (13) After appraisal of the entire evidence and circumstances on the record, the learned lower court concluded that the prosecution story was proved beyond a shadow of doubt. He accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused as noted above. (14) Feeling aggrieved, the accused have filed this appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at a stretch and gone through the record. I find that there is absolutely no force in this appeal and it deserves to be dismissed. He accordingly convicted and sentenced the accused as noted above. (14) Feeling aggrieved, the accused have filed this appeal. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at a stretch and gone through the record. I find that there is absolutely no force in this appeal and it deserves to be dismissed. (15) The fact that an incident of marpti took place in the night around midnight of 1/2.5.76 near the Khalihan is not disputed. THE accused have also come out with a case of their own. They have also tried to prove their injury reports. They also lodged an F.I.R., although there was a delay. Even under Section 313, Cr. P.C. the accused Panna has admitted the occurrence. Of course, he has tried to change the nature and colour of the occurrence, to which I shall come later on. At this stage, suffice It to say that the happening of the incident is not disputed. (16) The place of occurrence is also not in dispute, except with minor modification of 10-20 feet either way. About 5 to 10 persons, admittedly, were present including the members of both the sides when the assailants starts menacingly towards the midnight and later on tries to run away. The complainant chases the victims and they try to run away. This the distance of 15-30 feet is easily covered. Learned counsel for the appellants has tried to make a capital out of this distance of few feet either way. But I do not think it goes into the merits of the case. Such a minor difference of distance regarding the place of occurrence, Is totally negligible and insignificant. Hence I find that the learned lower court has rightly concluded that the parties were not at variance with regard to the place of occurrence. Now the main question for determination is as to which party was an aggressor and if so, whether the defence version is at all true. Learned lower court has rejected the defence version finding it to be flimsy and concocted. He has assigned good reasons for the same. I find myself in total agreement with the learned lower court. In coming to a conclusion as to which parry was an aggressor, the number and nature of injuries is very important. Learned lower court has rejected the defence version finding it to be flimsy and concocted. He has assigned good reasons for the same. I find myself in total agreement with the learned lower court. In coming to a conclusion as to which parry was an aggressor, the number and nature of injuries is very important. At this stage, we may have a glance over the injuries on the side of the accused as noted by the learned trial court in the body of his judgment. Ghurahu had a traumatic swelling on the left side of his back. He had another traumatic swelling on the right leg outer side. The second injury was a contusion on the back and the fourth injury was complaint of pain. All these injuries could have been self-suffered or even self-inflicted without showing much tolerance and valour. (17) The injuries of Smt Phulpatti consisted of a contusion on the right side of the back and another contusion on the left side of thigh. Another contusion on the right side of thigh and a traumatic swelling on the back of left hand. Her injuries are also of same flimsy nature and on non-vital parts of the body. They could be self-suffered or self-inflicted easily. (18) The injuries of Panna consisted of two contusions-one on the right scapula and the other on the left thigh inner side. Two other injuries are abrasions. This way, these three injury reports could be easily concocted. Another important feature of this injury reports is that the injured persons were examined between 8-9 p.m. on 2.5.76 although the incident took place in the night of 1/2.5.76. No reason has been assigned as to why so much of delay was caused in getting the medical examination of the injuries done of these persons. (19) Somehow or the other, the report was lodged by the accused after a considerable delay. Therefore, it can be easily assumed that after causing the incident with P.W. 1 Panna Lal, the accused consulted legal brains and acted accordingly by getting some injuries either self-suffered or self-inflicted and obtaining medical reports to that effect. These things are easily done and there can be no difficulty in obtaining certificates of this nature. Therefore, suffice it to say that the defence version was rightly rejected by the learned lower court. These things are easily done and there can be no difficulty in obtaining certificates of this nature. Therefore, suffice it to say that the defence version was rightly rejected by the learned lower court. (20) Another important feature of the case is that the nature of injuries received by P.W. 1 Panna Lal were very serious in nature. These injuries are on the vital part of the body, specially injury No. 1. That could be dangerous to life. Surgical emphysema was present. The patient was unconsicious and even efforts were made to record his dying declaration, of course, that is not a good piece of evidence as the victim has survived. By any stretch of imagination, the injuries of Panna Lal, P.W. 1 could not be self-suffered or self-inflicted, may even the accused did not deny. Rather accused Panna In his statement under Section 313, Cr. P.C. admits that he caused injuries with a Khanti But this question was not put to the doctor Rastogi when he was in the witness box. Moreover, the nature of Khantt weapon is such that such injuries with such a depth could not be caused by it. At this stage, it is important to say that the injuries of P.W. 1 Panna Lal were very serious in nature. Dr. Rastogi has opined that they could be caused by spear. It is the spear weapon, which has been alleged by the prosecution to be the cause of the injuries on the person of Panna Lal, P.W. 1 and that is corroborated by the statement of Dr. Rastogi, P.W. 9 what is emphasised at this stage is this that the nature of injuries plays a determining and decisive role in a case where the job of the court is to search for the aggressor. After applying this acid test, the learned lower court has rightly concluded that the accused side was a rank aggressor. Another criteria available to the court to find out as to which party could be aggressor, was the motive for the crime. It is not disputed that Smt. Rajwanti is the aunt of the accused, Mittan and regarding her property, a litigation in the consolidation courts was going on. Panna Lal, P.W. 1 was doing pairvi on behalf of Smt. Rajwanti. It has also come in the statement of Panna Lal. It is not disputed that Smt. Rajwanti is the aunt of the accused, Mittan and regarding her property, a litigation in the consolidation courts was going on. Panna Lal, P.W. 1 was doing pairvi on behalf of Smt. Rajwanti. It has also come in the statement of Panna Lal. The accused had alleged that Smt. Rajwanti had died and they wanted to grab her property. But Panna Lal became instrumental and brought Rajwanti and made her to file an objection. He started doing pairvi on her behalf. When this question was put to the accused under Section 313, Cr. P.C., Kashi accused stated that he do not know. At the same time, he did not take it ill against Panna Lal, P.W. 1 But Ram Dhandi accused admitted that he did not know anything about it. Uniform reply was given by Badri, Algu and Panna. Panna made a lengthy statement in reply to question No. 16 under Section 313, Cr. P.C. But he intentionally did not touch this litigation dispute with Smt. Rajwanti. It is difficult to believe that the accused would turn so platonic and philosophic and will refuse to treat Panna Lal as their enemy despite this fact that he had been litigating on behalf of Smt. Rajwanti and disturbing their plan to grab her property. It is against human nature. Rather, it is natural to believe that they all thought that it was Panna Lal who was the main disturbing factor and causing blockade in their design to devour the interest of Smt. Rajwanti. This way, they would try to eliminate such an enemy like Panna Lal, P.W. 1. It was in pursuance of this thinking and design that this onslaught was launched against P.W. 1, Panna Lal. (21) It is admitted by the accused that accused Mittan and Vishambhar are the Pattidars. Panna, Rain Dhani, Badri, Algu, Mittan and Kashi belong to the same party. Except a vegetarian denial and half hearted cross-examination on this point, nothing has been done, to disprove this allegation. In the complaint lodged against the prosecution side by Ghurahu, who is the father of Panna accused, the witnesses cited are some of the accused like Kashi, Kalloo and others. Except a vegetarian denial and half hearted cross-examination on this point, nothing has been done, to disprove this allegation. In the complaint lodged against the prosecution side by Ghurahu, who is the father of Panna accused, the witnesses cited are some of the accused like Kashi, Kalloo and others. So, it is established from the statement of Panna Lal, P.W. 1, injured himself that the accused had taken his conduct as inmical and hostile to them as he was doing pairvi on behalf of Smt. Rajwanti. They formed an unlawful assembly to teach him a lesson and with this advance preparation, they committed the crime. Whereas, the story of Bhut pret (ghosts) alleged by the accused does not find any substance or corroboration. Hence it has been rightly rejected. Moreover, it will not be so strong that the prosecution side could go and launch an attack causing almost on injuries on the side of the accused or at the most, flimsy Injuries only and instead receiving almost fatal Injuries as done by Panna Lal, P.W.I. There fore, the motive set up by the prosecution for the crime stands corroborated from this situation as well. This shows that the accused could have made preparation for launching the attack and they were aggressors. As against it, the story set up by the defence has rightly been rejected as an imaginary and false one. (22) In this background when we approach the evidence on the record, I find that it gives a robust support to the prosecution case. Much capital has been tried to be made on the ground that the F.I.R. was lodged after considerable delay. The explanation given by the complainant is that since his brother Panna Lal was in a very serious condition, therefore, his prime consideration was to lodge him in the hospital and provide adequate medical aid then to rush to the police station leaving his brother alone in lurch fighting for life. Had it been the conduct of Halloo Ram, complainant as expected by the learned defence counsel, I would have immediately rejected it as inhuman, unnatural and unreasonable. the court should sit in the arm chair of Kalloo Ram, P.W. 3 and then decide as to whether in such a circumstance, Kalloo Ram would have behaved otherwise. Had it been the conduct of Halloo Ram, complainant as expected by the learned defence counsel, I would have immediately rejected it as inhuman, unnatural and unreasonable. the court should sit in the arm chair of Kalloo Ram, P.W. 3 and then decide as to whether in such a circumstance, Kalloo Ram would have behaved otherwise. I think that the only answer to this question would be that a human being with normal senses, would have behaved in the same manner as Kalloo Ram had done. He took his brother to the hospital first and was running from top to bottom to ensure adequate medical aid to him. His condition even, according to Dr. Rastogi, was pretty serious. Therefore, only after some stability was obtained in his condition that Kalloo Ram thought of moving the machinery of law. This fact is proved from the statement of Dr. Rastogi, who examined Panna on 2.5.76 at 4.30 a.m. Not even a single question was put to him regarding the seriousness of the condition of Panna Lal, P.W. 1 not only this Dr. Rastogi had recommended for recording the dying declaration of Panna Lal. When the Magistrate recorded the statement. Exhibit Ka-6, he gave a mental fitness certificate. This also show that the condition of Panna Lal was very serious. Therefore, a delay in lodging the report, in my view, was virtually non-existent. Even if it is treated to be a delay by a hyper-technical judicial mind. I find that it has been adequately explained. Therefore, this level of charge against the complainant made by the accused, is rejected. The F.I.R. is good in all other respects. It has named the accused, mentioned the date, time and place of occurrence, names of the witnesses, the place of occurrence, the weapons used by the accused and the prior as well as subsequent conduct of the complainant himself, including taking the victim to the hospital and still maintaining that his condition was continuing to be causing anxiety to him as he had not regained consciousness till the lodging of the report at 12.15 p.m. on 2.5.76. Nothing material has been added by the prosecution during the course of evidence and trial from the story taken in brief in the F.I.R. Therefore, the F.I.R. in this case contains almost everything upon which the prosecution case has been built up. Nothing material has been added by the prosecution during the course of evidence and trial from the story taken in brief in the F.I.R. Therefore, the F.I.R. in this case contains almost everything upon which the prosecution case has been built up. Such an F.I.R. is a very strong corroborative piece of evidence in a criminal case. I am happy that the learned lower court has given adequate weight to this F.I.R. Panna Lal is an injured person. His presence on the spot is admitted. He knew the accused from before. There were exchanges of words between him and the accused prior to the occurrence. There were torches. The accused came in a very close contact with Panna Lal therefore, he had all possible opportunity to correctly identify the accused persons. Even in the complaint to the S.S.P., Exhibit Kha-8, by Ghurahu, the involvement of Panna Lal, P.W. 1 is given a banner heading. Panna Lal has described in a very pictorial manner as to how the accused came and pounced upon him near his Khalihan and assaulted him. He further says that he had a torch. He did not assault any person on the side of the accused. Honestly enough, he says in paragraph 14 that although four persons had spears, but only 2 of them assaulted him with spears. Other accused too were present no doubt. They were morally supporting the remaining accused. Further he says that hearing his alarm, the witnesses came there flashing their torches. This way, he does not try to unnecessarily exaggerate the role of the accused, which they did not play and has slicked to the truth. Very detailed cross-examination was made and many insignificant questions regarding the occurrence were put to him as to whose spear pierced him and where, whether he fell down immediately thereafter or a little later and as to whether he stated in detail about this fact in the dying declaration. I find that these unnecessary details could not be narrated by this witness in the dying declaration because at that Juncture, his condition was very serious. Similarly, the I.O. recorded his statement after a considerable delay for no fault of this witness. The statement under Section 161, Cr. P.C. is never expected to be so detailed as one made in the court. Similarly, the I.O. recorded his statement after a considerable delay for no fault of this witness. The statement under Section 161, Cr. P.C. is never expected to be so detailed as one made in the court. He says that he cannot say as to why the I.O. did not mention that he had a torch, although he did make a statement to him. He has denied the suggestions that there was any quarrel amongst the ladies on the point of ghosts or he assaulted anyone on the side of the accused. In paragraph 24, he says that the Consolidation Officer had decided the matter in favour of Mittan accused. An appeal before the S.O.C. was pending when the occurrence took place. Further, he says that he sent a message to Smt. Rajwanti to call her from her father's house to file an objection to the consolidation courts. The I.O. did not question this witness on this point. So, he did not tell him because the I.O. could not be so imaginative. Moreover, the fact that Panna Lal was doing pairvi on behalf of Smt. Rajwanti was not disputed in the trial court. (23) Thus after ignoring the minor tit-bits here and there, I find that the solitary statement of Panna Lal, P.W. 1, duly corroborated by medical evidence, is sufficient to record a conviction in this case against the accused. (24) P.W. 3, Kalloo Ram is the complainant and also an eye-witness of the occurrence. He has given an occular testimony regarding the fact. Despite a lengthy cross-examination, nothing material could be obtained in his cross-examination. Further he says that before lodging the report, he could not talk to Panna Lal, P.W. 1 as he was not in a position to make a statement, nor he had any conversation with the witnesses. I find that the presence of Kalloo Ram on the spot, has not been denied. Rather, it is fully proved. His house is also nearby. So his arrival on the spot after hearing an alarm of his brother, was quite imminent and natural so his evidence is equally credible. Simply because he did not receive any injury or he is the brother of the victim, his evidence cannot be rejected. The prime culprit in the eyes of the accused was Panna Lal. So the accused wanted to eliminate him and not Kalloo Ram. Simply because he did not receive any injury or he is the brother of the victim, his evidence cannot be rejected. The prime culprit in the eyes of the accused was Panna Lal. So the accused wanted to eliminate him and not Kalloo Ram. P.W. 2 Phunnan was present at the time when the accounts were being settled by Ram Chandra Singh, P.W. 4. Immediately after Panna Lal left after his accounts were settled, Panna Lal started crying from near his Khalihan drawing the attention of all, including this witness. Naturally the witnesses along with their torches rushed towards the place of occurrence. He was interrogated by the I.O. after 4-5 months for no fault of his. As seen earlier right from the beginning, the Investigating Agency was not serious. The name of this witness finds place in the F.I.R. He has given a detailed discussion as to how the occurrence took place. He says that the accounts were being settled in the light of a lantern, although while rushing towards the spot, the witnesses rushed with the torches only. Whether the accused had surrounded Panna Lal fully or only half was a question put to this witness. He says that he made a statement to the I.O. But if it was not noted by him, he could not assign any reason for that. In the cross-case launched by the accused, with regard to this incident, he was arrayed as an accused. It has been admitted by him in paragraph 6 of the cross-examination. So even his presence on the spot is admitted to the accused. On account of enmity, his eyewitness testimony cannot be ignored. (25) P.W. 4 Ram Chandra Singh is an Accountant of the Co-operative Society. His presence has not been disputed in the cross-examination. Naturally when he heard the alarm raised by Panna Lal, he could rush towards the place of occurrence. He has given a very photographic description of the occurrence. He has categorically stated that no accused had received any injury in his presence. It was wrong to say that on account of litigation in the Consolidation Courts between him and Panna accused, he has come to give a wrong statement. In these days, the village people are divided into parties and that is natural consequence of democracy having its full flow at the grassroots. Therefore, absolutely neutral witnesses cannot be found with case. It was wrong to say that on account of litigation in the Consolidation Courts between him and Panna accused, he has come to give a wrong statement. In these days, the village people are divided into parties and that is natural consequence of democracy having its full flow at the grassroots. Therefore, absolutely neutral witnesses cannot be found with case. May totally neutral witness avoid to give a statement from any side. So this charge against Ram Chandra Singh, that he is hostile to the accused, cannot be seriously entertained. We have to examine as to whether, he could be naturally present on the spot and, if so, whether his testimony inspires confidence. When this test is applied, I find that the statement of Ram Chandra Singh is credible. In fact, Co-operative Society wherein he was an Accountant, serves the interest of the entire village, including the accused. He could have no difficulty in identifying the culprits with the help of torch lights as they were all known from before. So, the statement of this witness can be used as a good piece of corroboration. (26) I find that the learned lower court has properly appreciated the evidence and circumstances on the record of this case. Being a trial Judge, he had the privilege to watch the demeanour of the witnesses, the opportunity not available to an appellate court. In absence of any misdirection on his part, the appreciation of evidence made by the learned trial court deserves to be honoured. Rather, I find myself in complete concurrence with the conclusions arrived by the learned lower court. This way, the prosecution case has been fully proved beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt against the accused. The learned counsel urged that with the passage of time, the wounds have healed up and the accused should be given a lenient sentence. I do not agree. The accused took law in their own hands. They formed an unlawful assembly to commit such a serious offence. Therefore, they deserve no leniency. Seriousness of wounds inflicted on the person of Panna Lai, P.W. 1 was not possible unless all the accused actively aided and participated. At the time of occurrence, the accused were armed with lethal weapons. Every accused knew it. An advance preparation and planning was there. Therefore, they deserve no leniency. Seriousness of wounds inflicted on the person of Panna Lai, P.W. 1 was not possible unless all the accused actively aided and participated. At the time of occurrence, the accused were armed with lethal weapons. Every accused knew it. An advance preparation and planning was there. So charges under Sections 147 and 148, I.P.C. have been fully proved against the accused and they have been properly convicted. The sentence is also lenient. Further softening is not permissible in law. (27) Taking all these factors into consideration, I find that there is no force in this contention of the learned counsel that the sentence should be further reduced. (28) The appeal is accordingly dismissed. The judgment and order passed by the learned lower court are upheld. The accused are in ball. Their bail bonds and surety bonds are cancelled. They shall be taken into custody at once by the C.J.M. concerned and sent to Jail to serve out the sentence. C.J.M. shall submit a compliance report within one month from today. Appeal dismissed.