ORDER : G.N. Ray and G.T. Nanayati, JJ. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 26.9.1986 passed by the Division Bench of the Patna High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 556 of 1982. The aforesaid appeal was preferred by the 16 convicted accused against their conviction and sentence passed by the learned 4th Additional. Sessions Judge, Saharsa in Sessions Case No. 76/82 (9/81). Initially, 17 accused persons were sent up for trial for an incident which had taken place on 17.3.1977 at about 4 P.M. at village Gonha Tola Baharwa within police station Tribeniganj in the district of Saharsa. It is the prosecution case that the land of deceased Kaulendra Narain Singh was close to the house of the accused. Previously Khusi Lal Mandal and his son Sajan Mandal used to get Khesari crop grown on the land of Kaulendra Narain Singh grazed by their cattle for which dispute arose and the accused persons had to tender apology before a village panchayat. The accused entertained grudge against Kaulendra Narain Singh for such humiliation. On 17th March, Kaulendra had been to his field and found that the accused Sajan Mandal was grazing buffalos in the said field. Sajan Mandal was taken to task. He then rushed back to his house and shortly thereafter the said Sajan Mandal and the other accused in the company of some other persons numbering about 25 to 30 came to the field of Kaulendra Narain Singh being variously armed with Bhala, Farsa and Lathi. By that time, PW 8, Tapeswar Singh and PW 9 Ram Singh had also reached there. The accused persons objected to the taking away of the cattle by Kaulendra Singh and an altercation ensued. Then the accused Siban Mandal assaulted Kaulendra Narain Singh with a lathi. Kaulendra Narain Singh fell down in getting such lathi blow. Then accused Sajan Mandal hit him with a Farsa on his neck. Accused Khusilal Mandal assaulted PW 9 with Farsa on his head and accused Anandi Mandal assaulted with Anr. Farsa to PW 8 Tapeswar Singh. It is the prosecution case that the left hand of Tapeswar Singh was almost cut. Other accused also joined him in assaulting the victims, namely, Kaulendra, Tapeswar Singh and Rom Singh. Accused Khusilal Mandal assaulted PW 9 with Farsa on his head and accused Anandi Mandal assaulted with Anr. Farsa to PW 8 Tapeswar Singh. It is the prosecution case that the left hand of Tapeswar Singh was almost cut. Other accused also joined him in assaulting the victims, namely, Kaulendra, Tapeswar Singh and Rom Singh. Hearing the cries, a number of villagers including PW 2 PW 5 and PW 10 came running and seeing the villagers coming to the place of occurrence, the accused left the field leaving behind the cattle. 2. PW 14, Randhir Prasad arranged to take three injured victims to the hospital. PW 10, Subhash Singh was asked to get a tractor for the purpose. When the injured persons reached near Toharnea bridge on their way to Tribeniganj Kaulendra Narain Singh succumbed to his injuries. The dead body was kept on the tractor and they reached Tribeniganj police station. PW. 14 Randhir Prasad thereafter gave information to the police on the basis of which FIR Ex. 4 was drawn up. At the time of lodging the FIR, two injured Tapeswar Singh and Rom Singh were unconscious and were unable to make their statements. On the basis of such FIR, the police took up investigation and also recorded the statements of the witnesses. The prosecution examined 17 witnesses out of which witnesses No. 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 10 and 14 deposed as eye witnesses. It may be stated that out of the said witnesses PW 8 Tapeswar Singh and PW 9 Rom Singh were injured witnesses. PW 11, PW 12 were the doctors who had examined the injured and PW 15 was the doctor who had conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Kaulendra. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidences adduced, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, came to the finding that accused Sajan Mandal was liable to be convicted for the offence under Section 302 and the other accused persons were liable to be convicted for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC. The accused persons were also convicted for the offence under Section 24 of the Cattle Trespass Act. The accused persons were also convicted for the offence under Section 24 of the Cattle Trespass Act. The accused Khusi Lal Mandal and Anandi Mandal were, however, convicted for an offence under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code and accused Sajan Mandal, Khusi Lal Mandal and Anandi Mandal were also convicted for the offence under Section 148, Indian Penal Code. Accused Tej Narayan Singh was, however, acquitted by giving him benefit of doubt because according to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, his identity was not established beyond doubt. The other accused were also convicted under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. As aforesaid, all the 16 convicted accused thereafter preferred Criminal Appeal 556/82 before the High Court. By the impugned judgment, the appeal has been dismissed and conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge has been upheld by the High Court. 4. Learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants has not appeared when the matter was taken up for hearing, but Mr. Jha, learned Counsel appearing for the State has fairly placed the judgments of the courts below and the relevant portions of the depositions of the witnesses for the consideration of this Court. It appears to us that the prosecution case, has been clearly established by a number of eyewitnesses who had seen the incident. PWs 8 and PW 9 were the injured eye-witnesses and their depositions were accepted by both the courts below and we also do not find any reason to discard the same. It may be stated here that the accused did not altogether deny the incident, but they contended in the courts below that the incident had not taken place in the manner alleged by the prosecution. It was contended that, as a matter of fact, the incident had taken place in the field of Billo Shah. According to the accused, they were attacked. As a result, some of them had also received injuries and a fardbeyan was also made on the basis of which a counter case was also started. Such fardbeyan of the counter case (Ext. C) was taken into consideration by the courts below. It has been held that no trace of cattle trespass could be noticed in the field of Bilo Shah. Such fardbeyan of the counter case (Ext. C) was taken into consideration by the courts below. It has been held that no trace of cattle trespass could be noticed in the field of Bilo Shah. On the contrary, in the field of Matuk Lal where Kaulendra Narain Singh fell down and received injuries, a piece of bhala and lathi were found by the investigating officer. The evidence of cattle trespass and cutting of Khesari crops in the field of Kaulendra were also noticed by the Investigating Officer who has deposed in the case. Accordingly, the trial court convicted the accused persons and the High Court agreeing with the finding has dismissed the appeal. In our view, the evidences adduced in the case are very clear and specific and therefore, there is no reason to interfere with the conviction and sentence passed against the Appellants, This appeal, therefore, fails and is dismissed. All the Appellants except 1, 12 and 15 have been released on bail during the pendency of this appeal. They are directed to be taken into custody to serve out the sentence and their bail bonds stand cancelled. Appeal dismissed.