Judgment S.N.Mishra, J. 1. The aforesaid two criminal appeals along with the Death Reference No. 3/96 and Cr. Appeal No. 303/96 were heard together by a Division Bench but since the learned Judges took a divergent view these two appeals have been placed for hearing before me by an order of the Hon ble Chief Justice. 2. These two appeals aforesaid and the Death Reference along with Cr. Appeal No. 303/96 arise out of the judgment and order dated 19th July, 1996 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhabua, whereby the learned Judge has found the appellants Nagwa Devi and Dasarath Bind guilty of the charges under Section 302, IPC and appellant Dasarath Bind was sentenced to death and directed to be hanged by neck till his death. The appellant Nagwa Devi, however, was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. The trial Court has found the accused Bigan Bind, Ram Surat Bind, Swarath Bind and Kumar Bind, who are appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 303/96, guilty under Section 302/34, IPC and they were also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. However, the trial Court has acquitted accused Khar Chamar as the prosecution has failed to prove its case against him beyond all reasonable doubt. The accused Bigan Bind, Ram Surat Bind, Swarath Bind and Kumar Bind have filed separate appeal being Cr. Appeal No. 303/96 and similarly the accused Nagwa Devi and Dasarath Bind filed separate appeals which were registered as Cr. Appeal Nos. 337 and 364 of 1996 respectively. Both the learned Judges have found the appellants of Cr. Appeal No. 303/96 not guilty of the charges framed against them on the basis of the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution and ultimately acquitted them of the charges. As regards the appellant Dasarath Bind, one of the Judges, namely, Mr. Justice R.N. Sahay has found the appellant Nagwa Devi as well as Dasarath Bind guilty of the charges under Section 304, Part I, IPC and sentenced them to 7 years rigorous imprisonment and, accordingly, the Death Reference has been discharged having regard to the fact that conviction of the appellant Dasarath Bind was altered to that of Section 304, Part I, IPC Mr. P.K. Sarkar, J. However, has found both the appellants Nagwa Devi and Dasarath Bind guilty of the charges under Section 302, IPC and confirmed the sentences of life imprisonment passed by the trial Court. However, the sentences of death awarded by the trial Court has been altered to that of imprisonment for life and, accordingly, sentence of death passed by the trial Court against accused Dasarath Bind has been set aside. With the aforesaid modification in the order of sentence the learned Judge has dismissed the appeal. As stated above, all the appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 303/96 have been acquitted by both the learned Judges. The remaining two appeals namely, Cr. Appeal Nos. 337 and 364 of 1996 wherein a divergent view has been expressed by the learned Judges, have come up before me by order of the Hon ble Chief Justice, as stated above. 3. Though the prosecution case has been set out by R.N. Sahay, J., in his judgment yet I feel inclined to mention the prosecution case in detail in order to appreciate the points involved as well as rival contention raised by the learned Counsel for the parties. The prosecution case briefly stated is that the informant Gangaratia Devi, P.W. 3, lodged a first information report to the effect that the deceased Bigan Bind, her son-in-law; and deceased Sadan Bind came to her at village Nauajhoti on a scooter. Both Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind stayed for some time at her house and, thereafter, they started for the village Siwo on foot with scooter in hand. The informant claimed to have gone with them only to see them off. Both Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind came to the door of the appellant Dasarath Bind at about 12.15 p.m. It is further alleged that appellant Nagwa Devi, Dasarath Bind along with 4 other accused persons of Cr. Appeal No. 303/96 caught hold Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind and brought them in the courtyard of their house. The informant was also following them. It is further alleged that all the accused persons including the appellants tied both the hands of Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind by taking their hands towards back with napkin. Thereafter, they threw Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind on the ground and assaulted with Farsa and Garasa. The informant was also following them. It is further alleged that all the accused persons including the appellants tied both the hands of Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind by taking their hands towards back with napkin. Thereafter, they threw Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind on the ground and assaulted with Farsa and Garasa. According to the prosecution Nagwa Devi assaulted the deceased Bigan Bind with Farsa and accused Dasarath Bind assaulted the deceased Sadan Bind with Garasa, as a result both Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind succumbed the injuries on the spot. It is alleged that when the informant raised India, accused persons dragged her out of the courtyard. Meanwhile several villagers came who were threatened by the accused persons and they were not allowed to enter into the courtyard. The motive of committing murder of these two persons alleged to be the illicit relation with accused appellant Nagwa Devi wife of accused Dasarath Bind. The deceased Bigan Bind, being son-in-law of the informant living with her at village Nauajhoti for the last 5-6 years and looking after the cultivation of the informant. It is alleged that during that period the deceased Bigan Bind developed illicit relation with accused appellant Nagwa Devi, wife of accused Dasarath Bind. It is further alleged that Nagwa Devi lived in the house of deceased Bigan Bind for three months and thereafter, deceased Bigan Bind removed her from his house. It is alleged that both the aforesaid deceased were killed because of such illicit relation with appellant Nagwa Devi. On the aforesaid allegation a first information report was lodged on the same day at about 3.30 p.m. at the residence of accused Dasarath Bind itself, which was registered, as Bhabua P.S. case No. 109/91. After usual investigation the police submitted char-gesheet and after completing the formalities the case was committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. Specific defence of appellant Nagwa Devi however, is that both the deceased after having kidnapped were taking their minor son on a scooter and when they made protest, the deceased fired shot on them. Accordingly, they caught hold both the deceased and killed them in exercise of the right of their private defence of their lives as well as life of their son. The other accused persons, however, pleaded not guilty and according to them they were falsely implicated in this case. Accordingly, they caught hold both the deceased and killed them in exercise of the right of their private defence of their lives as well as life of their son. The other accused persons, however, pleaded not guilty and according to them they were falsely implicated in this case. Accordingly accused Dasarath Bind lodged a first information report against the aforesaid two deceased, namely, Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind, which was registered as Bhabua P.S. case No. 110/91 under Sections 363 and 511, IPC. Including Sections 25 and 26 of the Arms Act. According to the defence, one country made pistol along with two cartridges and one empty cartridge were produced before the police by accused appellant Dasarath Bind at his door. The aforesaid Bhabua PS. case No. 110/91 was ultimately investigated and the counter version of the defence has not been proved, as it appears from the order of the trial Court. 4. In this case, the prosecution has examined altogether 16 witnesses in support of its case, out of which P.W. 1 Ramdeo Bind, P.W. 4 Manehi Bind, P.W. 5 Lallan Singh, P.W. 8 Tenguni Singh and P.W. 9 Nagina Bind are the hearsay witnesses of the occurrence. P.W. 7 Harbansh Singh, P.W. 10 Khudi Bind, P.W. 11 Potan Bind and P.W. 12 Ganga Lal Chaurasia are the tendered witnesses. P.Ws. 2 and 3 (informant) namely, Rama Shankar Bind and Gangaratia Devi, are the eye-witnesses of the occurrence. P.W. 14 is Dr. Ram Gobind Prasad, who has conducted post-mortem examination on the deceased. P.Ws. 6, 13, 15 and 16, namely Rama Kant Tiwari, Muna Dubey, Awadh Bihari Pandey and Sheo Shankar Prasad, are the formal witnesses, who have proved certain documents. The defence has also examined one witness, namely, Radhey Shyam Prasad, in order to prove the first information report lodged by the accused appellant Dasarath Bind. P.Ws. 6, 13, 15 and 16, namely Rama Kant Tiwari, Muna Dubey, Awadh Bihari Pandey and Sheo Shankar Prasad, are the formal witnesses, who have proved certain documents. The defence has also examined one witness, namely, Radhey Shyam Prasad, in order to prove the first information report lodged by the accused appellant Dasarath Bind. The trial Court has held that P.W. 3 Gangaratia Devi, who is informant and eye-witness of this alleged occurrence, has fully supported the prosecution case to the extent that accused Nagwa Devi, Dasarath Bind and other accused persons caught hold both the deceased and brought them to the courtyard and after tieing both the hands of the deceased persons, accused Nagwa Devi Killed the deceased Bigan Bind by inflicting repeated farsa blows whereas accused appellant Dasarath Bind gave garasa blows as a result both the persons died after having sustained the injuries of farsa and garasa on the spot. This witness has further stated in her evidence that head of the deceased Bigan Bind was chopped of by accused Nagwa Devi whereas leg of the deceased Sadan Bind was chopped of by accused Dasarath Bind. PW 2 Rama Shankar Bind has fully supported the mode and manner of the prosecution case and has stated that accused Nagwa Devi and Dasarath Bind caught hold of both the deceased and brought them in their house. He has seen both the deceased lying in the pool of blood in the courtyard of the house of accused Dasarath Bind. Similarly, P.W. 1 Ramdeo Bind and P.W. 5 Lallan Singh have also seen the deceased lying inside the house of accused Dasarath Bind. P.W. 4 Manehi Bind has stated that accused has not allowed the villagers from entering into their courtyard. P.Ws. 8 and 9, who are, no doubt, the hearsay witnesses of the occurrence, have stated that accused Nagwa Devi has confessed her guilt before him. Similarly, P.W. 9 Nagina Bind has stated that he has seen the accused Nagwa and Dasarath have brought both the deceased in their house after having caught hold of them. On the question of illicit relation of Nagwa Devi with deceased Bigan Bind, P.Ws. Similarly, P.W. 9 Nagina Bind has stated that he has seen the accused Nagwa and Dasarath have brought both the deceased in their house after having caught hold of them. On the question of illicit relation of Nagwa Devi with deceased Bigan Bind, P.Ws. 3, 4 and 5 are the relevant witnesses who have supported the relation with Bigan Bind and have further stated that deceased Bigan Bind has kept the accused Nagwa Devi with him for about three months in his village Siwo prior to the alleged occurrence. They have further stated that since accused Nagwa Devi was removed after three months which caused annoyance to the deceased Bigan Bind. In this case Dr. Ram Gobind Prasad has been examined as P.W. 14 by the prosecution, who has conducted the post mortem-examination on the deceased. He has conducted postmortem examination on the bodv of Bigan Bind on 28.5.1991 at 11.50 a.m.and found the following injuries : "1. Right hand chopped at the level of 1/1-2" above the wrist joint. 2. Abrasion dark in colour over right side of place covering temporal diagonasic region along with bulging of right eye. 3. Two incised wound 5" x 1/1-2 x bone cut and 10" x 4" x bone cut partially on the right (torn) on the post lateral aspect of obliquale and about 3" away from each other. 4. Incised wound 3"x l-2 x 1 / l-2 x bone cut over left arm in mid position. 5. Incised woune 7" x 1-1/2 x whole thick of sole on the right side. 6. Incised wound 1" x 1 / 1 -2 tissue deep over left leg in the medical aspect in upper position. 7. Incised wound 2/1-2 x 1" bone cut over radius and ulna of left forearm in the middle redical aspect. 8. Abrasion dark in colour 1 /1-2 x 1-2" over mid forehead." According to the Doctor the aforesaid injuries caused except injury Nos. 2 and 8 by sharp cutting weapon and the injury Nos. 2 and 8 caused by hard and blunt substance. Similarly he has also conducted post-mortem examination on the body of deceased Sadan Bind and found the following injuries : "1. Right leg chopped off at the level just above ankle joint with little attachment with skin in part. 2. Abrasion dark in colour over right side of face involving right temporal diagnostic region. 3. Similarly he has also conducted post-mortem examination on the body of deceased Sadan Bind and found the following injuries : "1. Right leg chopped off at the level just above ankle joint with little attachment with skin in part. 2. Abrasion dark in colour over right side of face involving right temporal diagnostic region. 3. Abrasion dark in colour cut left side of face involving left temporal diagnostic and medial region. 4. Bruise dark 6" x 4" one left plank mid brain. 5. Abrasion 3" x 1/1-2 dark in colour over right shoulder joint. 6. Incised wound 4" x 1/1-2 x partiable bone cut over right arm. 7. Incised wound 2/1-2 x 1/2 x whole (illeg) on the left ankle joint posterior. 8. Two incised wound 3" x 1" x 1 /4 and (torn) on the right leg posterior. One (torn) away from each other. 9. Incised wound 1-1/2 x 1/2 x tissue deep on the front mid aspect of right leg. According to the Doctor injury Nos. 1, 6 and 9 were caused by sharp cutting weapon and rest caused by hard blunt substance. Post mortem reports have been marked as Exts. 4 and 4/1 respectively. In this case blood stained spade and blood stained soil were seized and marked Exts. 1 and 2, which have been proved by Constable Awadh Bihari Pandey, P.W. 15. In this case both the accused appellants, namely, Nagwa Devi and Dasarath Bind, have made their statement under Section 164, Cr. P.C. which was recorded by the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bhabua. The statement of accused Nagwa Devi reads as follows : "It is the occurrence of four days ago. It was the day of Monday. Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind came to the darwaza of my house by scooter. By stopping the scooter, Sadan Bind picked up my son Deepak, whose age would be 4 years and Bigan Bind started the scooter and Sadan Bind rode on it alongwith my son. By that time, 1 ran away and caught hold of the handle of scooter of Bigan Bind. Thereafter, (the engine of) the scooter stopped (functioning). I caught hold of Bigan Bind under my grip. I threw down Bigan Bind on the ground and tied both of his hands in the back with his own Gamcha (a kind of towel). By holding his hand, I dragged him up to my courtyard. Thereafter, (the engine of) the scooter stopped (functioning). I caught hold of Bigan Bind under my grip. I threw down Bigan Bind on the ground and tied both of his hands in the back with his own Gamcha (a kind of towel). By holding his hand, I dragged him up to my courtyard. I cut Bigan Bind with a Farsa (Spade). Bigan Bind died there in the courtyard itself. Sadan Bind died there in the courtyard itself. Bigan Bind fired shot but my husband escaped and caught hold of him chasing him and throwing him down, he tied both his hands behind his back too. My husband Dashrath Bind brought Sadan Bind in the courtyard holding him by hand. He cut Sadan Bind by Farsa. He died too in the courtyard." The confessional statement of accused Dasarath Bind reads as follows : "It is an occurrence of three-four days ago. I was taking rest in my new mud built house at 12 Oclock noon. My wife Nagwa Devi raised hulla that Bigan and Sadan Bind were beating her. When 1 came out of the house I saw Bigan and Sadan Bind shooting at my wife with Katta (country made pistol) but the shot missed the target. Bigan and Sadan Bind had come on a scooter. When I was going to save my wife, Sadan Bind had fired at me also with Katta. As I hid myself behind Chami (heap of fodder) I did not receive Katta shot. Then I caught hold of Sadan Bind by chasing him. My wife caught hold of Bigan Bind sustaining courage. Many people of the village assembled there. As Bigan Bind and Sadan Bind had got my son Deepak, whose age is 4 years, seated in the middle of their scooter, hence this occurrence took place. Twisting the arms of Sadan Bind, I tied the same with his Gamcha (a kind of towel) itself and took him to the courtyard of my house. Thereafter I inflicted Farsa injury on the body of Sadan Bind. Thereafter Sadan Bind died in my courtyard itself. My wife Nagwa Devi committed the murder of Bigan Bind by repeatedly giving Farsa blow." The aforesaid statement made under Section 164, Cr. P.C. has been marked as Ext. 5 and 5/1 respectively. As stated above, one defence witness has also been examined on behalf of accused as D.W. 1 Radhey Shyam Prasad. My wife Nagwa Devi committed the murder of Bigan Bind by repeatedly giving Farsa blow." The aforesaid statement made under Section 164, Cr. P.C. has been marked as Ext. 5 and 5/1 respectively. As stated above, one defence witness has also been examined on behalf of accused as D.W. 1 Radhey Shyam Prasad. He is the Advocates clerk who had proved the F.I.R. of Bhabua P.S. case No. 110/91 marked Ext. 1. He has also proved seizure list of Bhabua P.S. case No. 110/91 marked Ext. C. Though he has stated in his evidence that he has no personal knowledge of the F.I.R. lodged by Dasarath Bind. 5. It appears that the learned Counsel for the appellants had contended before a Division Bench that the accused appellants in exercise of the right of private defence of the life and the life of their son had killed the deceased. There is no controversy and/or dispute so far the killing of the two persons by these appellants Nagwa Devi and Dasarath Bind as they themselves had admitted in their statement made under Section 164, Cr. P.C. as well as during their examination under Section 313, Cr. P.C. Mr. Justice R.N. Sahay has observed in paragraph 19 of the judgment that the conviction of accused appellants is wholly based upon the confessional statements of the appellant Dasarath Bind and Nagwa Devi which are wholly illegal as the said statements have not been legally proved since the Magistrate, who has recorded such statements has not been examined and, as such, cannot be held to be a legal evidence for the purpose of conviction. The learned Judge has accepted the defence version after having relied upon Ext.-A F.I.R., on the ground that the evidence on record, discloses divergent picture of the entire episode. Learned Judge has also opined that the prosecution evidences are not such which go to prove the mode and manner of the occurrence, as disclosed by the prosecution. The learned Judge has also disbelieved the mode and manner of the prosecution case due to recovery of arms and ammunition from the possession of the deceased persons. 6. Learned Judge has also opined that the prosecution evidences are not such which go to prove the mode and manner of the occurrence, as disclosed by the prosecution. The learned Judge has also disbelieved the mode and manner of the prosecution case due to recovery of arms and ammunition from the possession of the deceased persons. 6. The principal argument of the learned Counsel for the appellants is the same as has been raised before a Division Bench, in as much as, it has been submitted that the prosecution has to prove its case on its own and since the prosecution has failed to establish its case beyond all reasonable doubt, the conviction of the appellants is not sustainable in the eye of law. It is further submitted that conviction of the appellants on the basis of the statement recorded either under Section 164 or 313, Cr. P.C. cannot be allowed to stand. In sum and substance learned Counsel has submitted that the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt and the alleged occurrence has been committed by the appellants in exercise of their right of private defence of their lives and/or their son. According to the learned Counsel no independent witness has been examined in support of the prosecution case and, as such, even the conviction of the appellants under Section 304, Part I, IPC cannot be legally sustained which is based upon the solitary statements recorded under Sections 164 and 313, Cr. P.C. According to the learned Counsel the prosecution has completely failed to establish its case regarding the mode and manner of the alleged occurrence. In opposition, learned Counsel for the State has, however, submitted that having regard to the prosecution case and the evidences laid in support thereof, it can safely be held that there was no danger of the lives of the appellants and/or their son, as according to their own version, they caught hold of the deceased, tied them and brought to the courtyard, and accordingly it is submitted that there was absolutely no apprehension of any danger of their lives and/or their son. The moment the deceased were caught hold of and were tied and brought to the courtyard there was no longer any apprehension for using any force against the deceased and, as such, the conviction of these two appellants has rightly been upheld by one of the Judges Mr. Justice P.K. Sarkar. 7. Having regard to the rival contentions, the question which arises in these appeals lies within a view narrow compass. Ultimately decision of the question raised by the learned Counsel for the appellants would depend upon the ambit, scope of Section 100, IPC which inter alia provides that the right of private defence of the body extends subject to the restriction as mentioned in Section 99 of the Code. Section 99, IPC is usefully quoted below : "99. Acts against which there is no right of private defence.There is no right of private defence against an act which does not reasonably cause apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by a public servant acting in good faith under colour of his office, through that act may not be strictly justifiable by law. There is no light of private defence against an act which does not reasonably cause the apprehension of death or of grievous hurt, if done, or attempted to be done, by the direction of a public servant acting in good faith under colour of his office, though that direction may not be strictly justifiable by law. There is no right of private defence in case in which there is time to have recourse to the direction of the public authorities. Extent to which the right may be exercised. The right of private defence in no case extends to the inflicting of more harm than it is necessary to inflict for the purpose of defence." 8. In order to appreciate the submissions of the parties the evidence both oral and documentary has to be considered with reference to the confessional statement as well as the statement made under Section 313, Cr. In order to appreciate the submissions of the parties the evidence both oral and documentary has to be considered with reference to the confessional statement as well as the statement made under Section 313, Cr. P.C. I am well aware that mere such statements, by themselves, will not be sufficient and/or legal to hold the accused persons guilty of the charges but the said statement can very well be considered while considering other relevant evidences adduced on behalf of the prosecution and to find out how far such statement recorded by the Magistrate under Sections 164 and 313, Cr. P.C. can be looked into. In that light oral evidence laid by the prosecution and the documents available on record has to be scrutinised carefully to find out as to which of the two versions is correct. Oral evidence laid by the prosecution which has been discussed in detail above, out of which P.Ws. 2 and 3 are the eye-witnesses of the occurrence who have been extensively cross examined but the defence has not been able to demolish their testimony Apart from the two aforesaid eye-witnesses the evidence of other witnesses which have been discussed in detail above, clearly supported the mode and manner of the prosecution case. The evidence of the doctor, who has conducted post-mortem examination on the deceased has been examined in this case. The injuries found on the person of the deceased, have already been mentioned in detail above, which clearly go to suggest how the two persons were killed at the hands of the appellants. The seizure list, namely, bloodstained spade, soil, clothes were recovered from the house of the accused Dasarath Bind, which have been proved and marked Exts. in the light of the oral as well as documentary evidence, the statement recorded under Sections 164 and 313, Cr. P.C. has to be considered. It is well-settled principle of law that the party pleadings self defence has to establish and the circumstances necessary for the exercise of right of self defence. The right of self defence cannot be said to exist and/ or proved as soon as it is found that there was no threat either of the person or his properties. It is well-settled principle of law that the party pleadings self defence has to establish and the circumstances necessary for the exercise of right of self defence. The right of self defence cannot be said to exist and/ or proved as soon as it is found that there was no threat either of the person or his properties. In that view of the matter, it has to be seen whether the appellants at the relevant time had a right to cause death in exercise of their right to private defence of their lives and/or their son. The prosecution case which has been accepted by the trial Court, is to the effect that these two appellants caught hold both the deceased, tied them by taking their hands backside, brought to their courtyard and, thereafter, thev inflicted garasa and farsa blow respectively causing several injuries on the persons of the deceased, as a result they died on the spot. The trial Court, accordingly, has held that the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt. Out of the 16 witnesses at least 2 witnesses including the informant who are eye-witnesses of the occurrence, have fully established the prosecution case. Relying upon the prosecution evidence both oral and documentary coupled with the injury report and the statement made by the accused themselves it can safely be held that there was absolutely no threat to the lives of the appellants and their son at the relevant time when they caught hold the deceased, tied them and brought to the courtyard and, as such, the plea of right of private defence, as raised by the appellants, had undoubtedly come to an end. The defence has not been able to establish its version that the alleged pistol and cartridges were recovered from the possession of the deceased and particularly when the case lodged by Dasarath Bind has not been found favour with the authority concerned and was ultimately dropped. It might have been possible that the said fire arms have been deli berately and/or knowingly produced by the accused in order to escape the rigour of law. That apart, as has been stated above, when the villagers on hearing hulla came to the place of occurrence, they were not allowed to enter into the courtyard by the accused. One of the learned Judges Mr. That apart, as has been stated above, when the villagers on hearing hulla came to the place of occurrence, they were not allowed to enter into the courtyard by the accused. One of the learned Judges Mr. Justice P.K. Sarkar having relied upon the major part of the prosecution evidence coupled with the injury report of the deceased, has accepted the prosecution case and I do not find any reason to differ with the view taken by P.K. Sarkar, J. The observation of Mr. Justice R.N. Sahay in paragraph 19 of the judgment to the effect that conviction of the appellants is based only on the confessional statement of the appellant Dasarath Bind and Nagwa Devi, is in my view, not absolutely correct having regard to the evidence available on record, which have been discussed in detail hereinabove. 9. After having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and going through the evidence on record, I am of the definite view that, at the relevant time there was absolutely no danger and/or threat of the lives of the appellants and/or their son as alleged by the accused appellants, therefore, plea of the right of private defence was not available to the accused persons as the threat came to an end the moment the deceased were caught hold by the accused appellants and brought them in the courtyard. I am supported by a decision of the apex Court in the case of Jai Dev and others v. State of Punjab, reported in 1963 SC 612. Accordingly, the trial Court as well as Mr. Justice P.K. Sarkar has rightly held that the accused appellants are guilty of murder under Section 302, IPC. I, accordingly, agree with the findings and ultimate conclusion arrived at by Mr. Justice P.K. Sarkar and at the same time I regret to have taken a view different from Mr. Justice R.N. Sahay for whom I have great regard. 10. In the result, the order of conviction against the appellants passed by the trial Court which has been confirmed by P.K. Sarkar, J., with the modification in the sentence of appellant Dasarath Bind under Section 302, IPC is upheld. Consequently, these two appeals are dismissed.