JUDGMENT : G.N. Ray and G.T. Nanavati, JJ. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21st November, 1984 passed by the Division Bench of Patna High Court in criminal appeal No. 308/79. Initially, eight accused were charged for offence under Sections 302/149, 302 read with Section 34 and Sections 148, 326 and 324 IPC. One of the accused, Madan Singh died before the trial was commenced. So, ultimately seven of the accused faced the trial before the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Patna. The learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted all the seven accused. The convicted accused preferred the said appeal before the High Court. By the impugned judgment, the High Court acquitted Panchu Singh but has convicted Chhotan Singh under Section 302 for murdering Jagdeo. The High Court has convicted the other accused under Section 302 read with Section 149 for all the three murders and some of the accused were also convicted under Section 302 read with 34, Section 326 and 324 IPC. The six accused who were convicted by the High Court preferred a special leave petition before this Court but such special leave petition was dismissed by an order dated 11th February, 1987 so far as the five accused-Petitioners were concerned. Leave was granted only in respect of the Appellant Paramhans Singh. 2. We have taken into consideration the evidences adduced in this case through which we have been taken by the learned Counsel for the Appellant. The injured eye-witnesses, namely, PW 4 Bishuni Manjhi, PW 6 Kusheshwar Rai and PW 12 Bhikhari Rai (who is father of one of the deceased Mahesh Rai) have categorically deposed that the Appellant Paramhans Singh came armed with a sword and he had also participated in execution of the common object by causing injuries on Karu. It is the specific case of the prosecution that when one of the accused Panchhu Singh had an altercation with a member of the complainant's party, he raised an alarm and then all the accused including the Appellant Paramhans Singh came variously armed. In view of such specific deposition by the injured eyewitnesses, the conviction of Paramhans Singh for the offence of murder with the aid of Section 149 IPC appears to be fully justified. We, therefore, find no reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence passed against Paramhans Singh. This appeal therefore, fails and is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.