N. S. GUPTA, J. Ant Ram (aged 50 years) and his three sons viz. Jaivir (aged 16 years), Kalloo (aged 19 years) and Omvir (aged 16 years) were brutally murdered on 4-12-92 at about 5. 00 p. m. in the jungle of village Ahrora, police station Jansath, dis trict Muzaffarnagar. Accused appellant Kirnu and his sons Ambrish and Sanjay alongwith one Rakesh were tried and con victed for the said incident by Sri Kartae Singh, the then Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar who vide his judg ment and order dated 4-3-1998 convicted them. Accused Kirnu, Ambrish and Rakesh were sentenced to undergo R. I. for a period of 3 years under Section 148, I. P. C. , 7years R. I. under Sections 307/149, I. P. C and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of the payment of the same to further undergo R. I. for a period of two years. The sentences were to run concur rently. Accused appellant Kirnu, Ambrish and Rakesh were sentenced to death under Sections 302/149, I. P. C. subject to the con firmation of the said sentence by this Court. Accused Sanjay though convicted but was given the benefit of Children Act, he being less than 16 years of age on the date of occurrence and was therefore, not sent to jail. Accordingly the aforesaid criminal reference for the confirmation of the death sentence was submitted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge to this Court. The accused-appellant Kirnu, Ambrish and Rakesh preferred the aforesaid criminal appeals. The com plainant Smt. Anaro preferred Criminal Revision No. 427 of 1998 against the ac cused-appellant Sanjay. Sanjay did not prefer any appeal against the order of his conviction. Since the reference, criminal appeals and criminal revision in question arose out of the one and same judgment, all these matters were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judg ment. 2. The prosecution story briefly stated is as follows: The complainant Smt. Anaro (P. W. 1) is the unfortunate widow of deceased Ant Ram and mother of deceased Jaivir, Kal loo and Omvir. She was a resident of vil lage Ahrora where her husband Ant Ram was having agricultural land. Accused ap pellant Kirnu was the cousin brother of deceased Ant Ram. She was a resident of vil lage Ahrora where her husband Ant Ram was having agricultural land. Accused ap pellant Kirnu was the cousin brother of deceased Ant Ram. He was having litiga tion on the point of land which was going on in the court of Tehsildar Jansath, in which 2-12-1992 was fixed as the date of hearing. The said date was adjourned to 10-12-1992. Accused appellant Kirnu for-ceably wanted to grab the land belonging to Ant Ram and for that purpose he had called some bad characters from outside the district, a few days before the date of occurrence of this case. 3. The incident of this case took place on 4-12-1992 at about 5. 00 p. m. At that time the complainant Smt. Anaro, her hus band Ant Ran (deceased) and her three sons viz. deceased Jaivir, Omvir and Kal-loo as also the servant Surendra (P. W. 3) were returning to their house from their fields. Surendra (P. W. 3) was driving the buffalo-cart which was loaded with fodder of sugarcane. The deceased Ant Ram and Jaivir were sitting on the buffalo-cart. The complainant and his sons Omvir and Kal-loo were following the bullockcar on foot. Jabar Singh (P. W. 2) was also follow ing them. When all these persons came near the pumping set of accused-appellant Kirnu, Kirnu along with his sons Arnbrish and Sanjay, son-in-law Subhash and Rakesh and Narcndra emerged out from the sugarcane field of Kirnu. Subhash was armed with rifle, Ambrish was armed with a gun and the rest of the accused persons were armed with country- made pistols. Narendra stopped the bullock- cart, there upon, Kirnu, Ambrish, Sanjay, Rakesh and Subhash opened fire upon Ant Ram and his sons Jaivir, Omvir and Kalloo caus ing their instantaneous death on the spot. The complainants servant Surendra (P. W. 3) also sustained gun shot injuries but escaped evil consequence of death. The complainant raised an alarm and attracted Jabar Singh (P. W. 2) and various other villagers. The accused-appellants and their associates ran away from the spot. The complainant thereafter came at her house. She got a report (Exh. Ka-1) about this occurrence written by Dhanpal of his village and took the same to the police station Jansath, which lay at a distance of about six kilometres from the scene of occurrence, at about 5. 50 p. m. on 4-12-1992. The complainant thereafter came at her house. She got a report (Exh. Ka-1) about this occurrence written by Dhanpal of his village and took the same to the police station Jansath, which lay at a distance of about six kilometres from the scene of occurrence, at about 5. 50 p. m. on 4-12-1992. On the basis of the said F. I. R. Head Constable Jagraj Singh (P. W. 8) prepared Chik report and made proper entries in the general diary of the police station. Case Crime No. 149 under Sections 147/148/149/307/302, I. P. C. was registered and in vestigation followed. 4. Inspector Bajrang Bahadur (P. W.), who was then working as S. H. O. Jansath immediately took up the investigation of the case in his hand. He immediately rushed to the scene of occurrence and got the inquest report prepared by S. I. Babu Ram Yadav in respect of the dead bodies of the deceased persons. After preparing necessary papers, he despatched the dead bodies of the deceased persons for post mortem examination to the district Head quarter Muzaffarnagar. He recovered blood stained and simple earth from near the dead bodies of Kalloo and Omvir and prepared recovery memo about the same. He searched out accused persons, but they were not available. He recorded the state ment of Smt. Anaro, Surendra and Jabar Singh on 5-12-1998. He carried out a detailed inspection of the scene of occur rence on 5-12-1998 and prepared a site plan Exh. Ka-30. He also recovered an empty cartridge from near the dead body of Kalloo and another cartridge of. 315 bore from near the sugarcane field of Kirnu. He also recovered a live cartridge and two empty cartridges of. 315 bore from Chak-road and prepared recovery memo about the same. He obtained processes under Sections 82/83, Cr. PC. against the accused persons. Accused Kirnu and Rakesh were arrested by S. I. Babu Ram. He tried to search out the accused Subhash, Sanjay, Ambrish and Narendra and for that pur pose he conducted raids on their houses. He sent case property for examination to the Chemical Examiner Agra on 26-12-1992. Thereafter he was transferred. 5. Further investigation into the mat ter was conducted by S. I. Raghvendra Singh who filed charge-sheet Exh. Ka-37 against the accused-appellants Kirnu, Ambrish, Rakesh as also Sanjay and Sub-hash. 6. He sent case property for examination to the Chemical Examiner Agra on 26-12-1992. Thereafter he was transferred. 5. Further investigation into the mat ter was conducted by S. I. Raghvendra Singh who filed charge-sheet Exh. Ka-37 against the accused-appellants Kirnu, Ambrish, Rakesh as also Sanjay and Sub-hash. 6. After committal, the case came up for trial before Sri Kartar Singh, the then Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffar nagar who framed charges under Sections 148/302/307 read with Section 149, I. P. C against the accused-appellants Kirnu, Ambrish, Rakesh and Sanjay. The charges show that co-accused Subhash and Narendra were probably dead. 7. Accused appellant Kirnu, Ambrish, Rakesh as also Sanjay pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Kirnu ad mitted that the deceased Ant Ram was his Khandani and that deceased Kalloo, Omvir and Jaivir were the sons of Ant Ram and Anaro (P. W. 1) was the widow of deceased Ant Ram. He denied his litiga tion on the point of land with Ant Ram and maintained that he had no son-in- law by the name of Subhash. He pleaded that the son-in-law of Ant Ram, Subhash who as a resident of village Khandrawali,policesta- tion Kandhla, district Muzaffarnagar and his friend Narendra and one Rakesh used to reside at the house of Ant Ram in village Ahrora. They were all bad characters who were kept by Ant Ram for forcibly oc cupying the land. Those persons used to threaten the accused-appellant Kirnu and his sons. He pleaded that the police had arrested him on 5-12-1992 at about 8. 00 a. m. from his house. During those days his younger son Sanjay who was then aged about 14-1/2 years used to reside at Meerapur with his elder brother Sant Ram. He was reading there. Accused ap pellant Kirnu further pleaded that Anaro (P. W. 1) did not reside in the village at the time of the incident. She used to reside at Khatauli. Surendra (P. W. 3) was not the servant of the deceased and a fake man by the name of Surendra was put up before medical Officer for medical examination. He further pleaded that it could not be said that the dead bodies which were produced by the police for post-mortem examina tion related to Ant Ram, Kalloo, Omvir and Jaivir. Surendra (P. W. 3) was not the servant of the deceased and a fake man by the name of Surendra was put up before medical Officer for medical examination. He further pleaded that it could not be said that the dead bodies which were produced by the police for post-mortem examina tion related to Ant Ram, Kalloo, Omvir and Jaivir. He maintained that the police had arrested him and pressurised him to get a report written because Ant Ram was his relation. S. I. Babu Ram Yadav had also obtained his signatures on some papers at the police station. He maintained that his sons Ambrish and Sanjay were also in nocent and that they all have been falsely implicated into this case. The accused-ap pellants, however, did not adduce any evidence in their defence. 8. After neefful trial into the matter the learned trial Judge convicted and sen tenced the accused- appellants as aforesaid. Hence this reference Criminal appeals and revision. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have re-appraised the evidence on record. 10. The prosecution in support of its case had examined eight witnesses, out of whom Smt. Anaro (P. W. 1), Jabar Singh (P. W 2) and Surendra Singh (P. W. 3) were the witnesses of fact. P. W 4 Dr. S. K. Bansal conducted the autopsy on the dead body of deceased Anant Ram and Jaivir on 5-12-1992 at 4. 10 and 4. 55 p. m. respectively. He found the position as under: Ant Ram (deceased) : The deceased was aged about 50 years. His body was average built. Rigor mortis was present all over the body. There was no dccom-posion. Eyes were half closed. The doctor found the following ante- mortem injuries on the per son of the deceased: Ante-mortem injuries ; (1) Gun shot wound of entry 2cm x 1 cmx bone deep on the (R) side face, 3 cm from outer to right eye. Blackening present around the wound. Margins were inverted and lacerated with pin size of abrasions all over the right side face. (2) Gun shot wound of entry 2 cmx 1 cmx chest cavity deep on the right side chest, 1 cm from right nipple near 2 oclock position. Black ening was present around the wound. Margins were inverted and lacerated. (3) Gun shot wound of exit 2. 5 cm x 1. (2) Gun shot wound of entry 2 cmx 1 cmx chest cavity deep on the right side chest, 1 cm from right nipple near 2 oclock position. Black ening was present around the wound. Margins were inverted and lacerated. (3) Gun shot wound of exit 2. 5 cm x 1. 5 cm x chest cavity deep on left side back, just below the inferior angle of scapula (left ). Margins were everted and lacerated. 11. On internal examination the doc tor found the position as under: One metallic bullet was removed from right maxilla under injury No. (1 ). Pleura was lacerated, both the lungs were lacerated. Ac cording to the doctor the death was caused due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of the Ante-mortem injuries. Jaivir (deceased) : 12. The deceased was aged about 16 years. His body was average built. Rigor mortis was present all over the body. There was no decomposition. The doctor found the following ante-mortem injuries on the person of the deceased: Ante-mortem injuries: (1) Gun shot wound of entry 1 cmx 1 cmx chest cavity deep on the right side chest, 14 cm below from the axillary fold. Blackening was present around the wound. Margins were in verted and lacerated. . (2) Gun shot wound of exit 2 cm x 1. 5 cm x chest cavity deep on the left side chest, 15 cm from left nipple near 1 Oclock position. Mar gins were everted and lacerated. 13. On internal examination the doc tor found 5th and 6th ribs broken on right side, pleura was lacerated. Both the lungs were lacerated. According to the doctor the death of the deceased was caused due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the aforesaid ante-mortem injuries. 14. Similarly, Dr. J. R. Jilani (P. W. 5) conducted the autopsy on the dead body of deceased Omvir and Kalloo on 5-12-1998 at 4. 10 and 4. 55 p. m. respectively. He found the position as under: Omvir (deceased) : The deceased was aged about 20 years. His body was average built. Rigor mortis was present all over the body. Eyes were half open. There was no decomposition. 10 and 4. 55 p. m. respectively. He found the position as under: Omvir (deceased) : The deceased was aged about 20 years. His body was average built. Rigor mortis was present all over the body. Eyes were half open. There was no decomposition. The doctor found the following ante- mortem injuries on the per son of deceased: (1) Gun shot wound of entry 5 cm x 4-1/2 cm x chest cavity deep on left side chest, 4 cm from nipple at 2 Oclock position. Underneath 2nd and 3rd ribs were fractured and lungs were lacerated. Two wedding pieces and 20 pellets were recovered from the right side back. Right scapula bone was found fractured. 15. On internal examination the doc tor found that the 3rd thorasis vertebra fractured. Left pleura was lacerated, left lung was lacerated. According to the doc tor the death was caused due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the aforesaid ante-mortcm injuries. Kalloo (deceased): 16. The deceased was aged about 18 years. His body was average built. Rigor mortis was present all over the body. No decomposition was present. The doctor found the following ante- mortem injuries on the person of deceased: (1) Gun shot wound of entry 3 cm x 2-1/2 cm x chest cavity deep of suprasternal notch. Direction was posterior and right. Underneath right lung was found ruptured and 5th rib was fractured. One khokha of bullet was recovered from posterior chest wall and one bullet from muscles of back scapular region. (2) Gun shot wound of entry 2-1/2 cm x 1-1/2 cm communicating injury No. 3 on the back of lower part or left forearm. Radius and Ulna bones were fractured. Blackening was present. (3) Gun shot wound of exit on left forearm communicating to injury No. (2 ). 17. On internal examination the Doc tor found the position as under: Fifth rib on right side fractured. Pleura was lacerated on right side. Right lung was lacerated. According to the doctor the death was caused due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of the aforesaid ante- mortem injuries. 18. P. W 6 Dr. Satish Kumar was the medical officer who medically examined Sri Surendra Singh (P. W. 3) on 4-12-92 at 9. Pleura was lacerated on right side. Right lung was lacerated. According to the doctor the death was caused due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of the aforesaid ante- mortem injuries. 18. P. W 6 Dr. Satish Kumar was the medical officer who medically examined Sri Surendra Singh (P. W. 3) on 4-12-92 at 9. 30 p. m. at PHC Jansath the injured eye witness of the occurrence and found fol- lowinginjuries on his person: Injuries of Surendra Singh (injured) (1) Fire arm lacerated wound of entry, margins were everted, 1 cm x 8 cm oval in shape. Blackening and tatooing were present on the back of right upper arm al Us middle 1/3. Fresh bleeding was present. (2) Fire arm lacerated wound of exit, mar gins inverted 1. 3 cm x 1. 3cm on the front of right upper arm, 8cm below the top of right shoulder. Fresh bleeding was present. 19. P. W 7gajraj Singh was the formal witness who proved Chik report and G. D. report. P. W 8 Bajrang Bahadur Singh was the Investigating Officer of the case. 20. It is clearly established from the medical evidence of aforesaid two doctors that all the four deceased persons viz. Ant Ram and his three sons Jaivir, Omvir and Kalloo had died because of the injuries caused to them by means of fire arms. The evidence of both these doctors is also clear and consistent on the point that the deceased persons should have died be cause of the said injuries on the date and time of the occurrence viz. 4-12-1992 at 5. 00 p. m. as was suggested by the prosecu tion and that these injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 21. Now the main question which arises for our consideration is to see as to whether the accused- appellants Kirnu, Ambrish; Sanjay, Rakesh and two others were responsible for committing the four ghastly murders. 22. The prosecution relied upon the direct evidence of three witnesses of fact viz. Smt. Anaro (P. W. 1), Jabar Singh (P. W 2) and Surendra Singh (P. W. 3) (injured ). Admittedly Smt. Anaro (P. W 1) is the un fortunate widow of deceased Ant Ram and the mother of three sons viz. Jaivir, Kalloo and Omvir who were killed in the incident of this case. Smt. Anaro (P. W. 1), Jabar Singh (P. W 2) and Surendra Singh (P. W. 3) (injured ). Admittedly Smt. Anaro (P. W 1) is the un fortunate widow of deceased Ant Ram and the mother of three sons viz. Jaivir, Kalloo and Omvir who were killed in the incident of this case. During the examination in chief she has fully corroborated the prosecution version. It was elicited during the course of cross-examination of this witness by the learned counsel for the defence in the trial court that she and her husband, deceased Ant Ram owned about 36 Big has of land which belonged to the elder brother of her husband Subey who died about six months before the date of occurrence of this case. She further stated that accused-appellant Kirnu was litigat ing on the point of land with her husband. Her husbands elder brother Subey had executed a will in favour of her sons. She was unable to state the date of the said will, but clearly staled that the litigation on the point of that will was going on and that about two days before the dale of this incident, the dale was fixed in the said case. She admitted that she was an illiterate lady and had not gone to the court on the last dale fixed. She was unable lo state the result of the said case. She stated that she was under the shock of the murder of her husband and sons. She had sold about 22-1/2 Big has of land out of which 11 Big-has was sold to Nawab and 11-1/2 Big has to one Radhey of her village. She maintained that she was now having about 13-14 Big has of land in the name of her husband. It would thus be seen that in spite of her being an illiterate, she was well conversant with the measurement and affairs of her land and had correctly stated the area of land sold by her lo two persons viz. Nawab and Radhey and the remaining area which remained with her. She said that the fields in which she, her husband and sons were working on the fateful date of occur rence was situate at a distance of about 450 paces. Her house and cattle shed were situate al one and the same place. Nawab and Radhey and the remaining area which remained with her. She said that the fields in which she, her husband and sons were working on the fateful date of occur rence was situate at a distance of about 450 paces. Her house and cattle shed were situate al one and the same place. When cross-examined on the point of her ser- vani, she stated that her servant Surendra Singh (P. W. 3) was working at her place for about two months and 10 days. The servant Surendra was kept by her husband. He belonged lo Bihar. "the name of nalive village of her servant was not known lo her. She made no objection for keeping the servant on the ground that he was a resi dent of outside. The servant was a good man. She said that she got it written down in the F. I. R. Exh. Ka-1 that her ser vant belonged to Bihar but was unable to furnish any explanations about the omis sion in this behalf from the averment of the F. I. R. Exh. Ka-1. Sml. Anaro slated that she had seen Narendra an associate of her husbands killer who was one of the par ticipant in the crime in question living at the residence of accused-appellant Kirnu. Her house and the house of Kirnu, ac cused-appellant were adjoining to each others. Accused Kirnu was not on visiting terms at her house. Although a back wall of the house if Kirnu was joining 10 the house of this complainant, but the way for going to the house of Kino was round about and the house of Kino through that way was situate at a distance of about 50-60 paces from her house, 23. When further cross-examined on the real incident Smt. Anaro staled that she herself brought the buffalo-cart after the incident to her house. The buffalo had run up to her house. She also came running lo her house. She siaied lhai when ihe fire was going on Narendra had caught hold of the rope of ihe nose of buffalo of her Buggi. The buffalo had slightly jumped up. She stated Thai she did not mention the fact that the culprit Narendra had caught the rope of the noss of the buffalo of her cart in the FIR. She siaied lhai when ihe fire was going on Narendra had caught hold of the rope of ihe nose of buffalo of her Buggi. The buffalo had slightly jumped up. She stated Thai she did not mention the fact that the culprit Narendra had caught the rope of the noss of the buffalo of her cart in the FIR. or to the I. O. because this fact was not enquired into from her by the Inves tigating Officer. She maintained that when fire was going on, she entered beneath the bullock-cart and from there she had wit nessed the entire occurrence. She staled that she was coming behind the buffaloand Jabar Singh (P. W. 2) was coming at a dis tance of 20-25 paces from her. She and her two sons were going at a distance of about 3-4 paces from the Buggi. Her two sons were going ahead of her and she was fol lowing them. She staled lay she had seen all the accused persons when she was fol lowing the Buggy. When further cross- ex amined about the real incident Smt. Anaro (P. W. 1) stood well the test of her cross-exanimation by slating that the accused per sons opened fire standing on the Chak Road. Narendra opened fire from the front side. The fields of accused-appellant Kirnu were adjoining lo the Chak Road. The width of the Chak Road was about four feet. The accused persons had come on the Chak Road when they had opened fire. Smt. Anaro furnished plausible explana tion regarding the absence of injury over her person by stating that because she had concealed herself inside the Buggi, there fore, the accused persons could not open fire upon her. When after the incident she started towards her village then too the accused-appellants did not open fire upon her because the accused-appellants and their associates had run away. She stated that she concealed herself under the Buggi then her son Omvir tried to run but the accused- appellants fired upon him from his back side. All the culprits had sur rounded Omvir and had opened fire upon him. At that time Narendra had caught hold of her bullock. She remained under the Buggi and from there she had witnesse the entire occurrence. All the culprits had sur rounded Omvir and had opened fire upon him. At that time Narendra had caught hold of her bullock. She remained under the Buggi and from there she had witnesse the entire occurrence. When the accused persons ran away then she came out from inside the Buggi and asked Jabar Singh to stop; there upon a number of villagers had come and the accused persons had run away. 24. After the arrival of the villagers she went near Omvir and found him dead. The dead body of her son Kalloo was lying at a distance of 100 paces from the place where the body of Omvir was lyingl Kalloo was killed near the Buggi. She went near the dead body of Kalloo and saw his dead body. At the time of firing she was under the Buggi. Kalloo was fired upon when he was towards the back of ihe Buggi. She stated that except Narendra all the five culprits had opened fire upon Kalloo. She did not see the wounds on the body of Kalloo but maintained that Kalloo had sustained two gun shot wounds. The ac cused persons had opened fire from a dis tance of about 2 paces upon Kalloo. Omvir was surrounded and then was fired upon. Her husband and son who were on Buggi were fired upon by the accused persons standing on the Chak Road. At that time her husband and son were sitting over the Buggi and she was on the back side of the Buggi when the accused-appellants had killed her husband and sons, she came out from Buggi. She stated that the accused-appellant first of all opened fire upon the persons sitting over the Buggi. 25. Sri G. S. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the accused-appellants has vehemently argued before us that this lady Smt, Anaro was not present at the time of the occurrence of the case and the version of occurrence which she has given up before the court below was a got up one. It is not possible for us to appreciate the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the appellants for the simple reason that the meticulous details about the occurrence have been stated by Smt. Anaro when her veracity was tested by the learned counsel for the defence at the trial court. It is not possible for us to appreciate the arguments put forward by the learned counsel for the appellants for the simple reason that the meticulous details about the occurrence have been stated by Smt. Anaro when her veracity was tested by the learned counsel for the defence at the trial court. She furnished plausible explanation as to how she escaped by stating that she concealed herself inside the Buggi and es caped from the evil consequence and had witnessed the entire occurrence. The fact that soon after the occurrence Smt. Anaro went to the police station Jansath which was situate at a distance of six Kilometres and reached there at about 5. 50 or 6. 00 p. m. , that is, just within 50-60 minutes of the occurrence lends assurance to the truthfulness of her version. 26. It is important to note here that when cross-examined on the point of F. I. R. Smt. Anaro stated that she had reached at the police station at about 6. 00 p. m. but the F. I. R. was got scribed by her at her house which took about 15-16 minutes. She stated that alongwith her, Jabar Singh and her servant Surendra had gone to police station. She stated that she had stayed at the police station for about 10-15 minutes. She did not see inspector incharge at that time. She handed over the report to the Munshi of the Police Station. The Munshi handed over a paper to her which was a copy of the chick report. She stated that no sub-inspector or inspector was sitting ax that place where the Clerk constable was sitting. She had gone to the police station in the tractor of Jabar Singh and came back from the police station in the same tractor within about 15 minutes and reached at her house by 6. 30 p. m. She staled that the police officials arrived at about 7. 00-7. 30 p. m. At that time she was weeping and crying al her house. The Investigating Of ficer did not interrogate her at that time. The police officials recorded her state ment on the next day in the morning at about 6. 00 a. m. She was unable to state as when the dead bodies were sealed. She stated that the dead bodies were taken away at about 10-11 p. m. in the tractor of Nawab. The police officials recorded her state ment on the next day in the morning at about 6. 00 a. m. She was unable to state as when the dead bodies were sealed. She stated that the dead bodies were taken away at about 10-11 p. m. in the tractor of Nawab. She was unable to state as to whe ther any police official remained at her ho use during the night. She was shocked and horrified and was weeping and weeping. 27. Sri G. S. Chaturvedi, learned counsel for the accused-appellants con tended before us that a lady in whose presence her husband and three young sons were murdered was incapable of dic tating the F. I. R. of the kind of the present one. She must have felt shocked and hor rified over the incident and would not have had courage to go to the police station, but the cross-examination of this lady which was made by Mr. Chaturvedis counter part at the trial court belies his argument for the obvious reason that she did not err on any point. Rather she strengthened the prosecution case more and more when her evidence was being assailed during the course of her cross-examination. 28. Smt. Anaro further stated that while going to the police station she did not take out the dead bodies from her Buggi. When she came back from the pence station then too the two dead bodies remained on the Buggi. A number of villagers were coming and going but when the police people had arrived they brought down the dead bodies from the Buggi. She was unable to state as to what papers were written by the police officials. She stated that she went to her field next day in the morning and at that time the dead bodies were not there. They were taken away by the police officials. She stated that it takes about 1-1/2 hours to two hours to go up to the district Head quarter Muzaffarnagar by means of a trac tor. The dead bodies were entrusted to her on the next day at about 7. 00 p. m. The funeral of the dead bodies was performed by the police in the evening because she had no close relations. 29. The dead bodies were entrusted to her on the next day at about 7. 00 p. m. The funeral of the dead bodies was performed by the police in the evening because she had no close relations. 29. Naturally when the husband and three young sons of this woman were mur dered and when she had no other close relations in the village, there was no point in her taking back the dead bodies to her village. The circumstances that the funeral of the deceased persons was performed by the police officials lends assurance to the credibility of the statement of this woman. 30. It was further elicited during the course of cross-examination of this witness that Uma was the wife of her deceased son Omvir and when the land of the share of Omvir was mutated in the name of Uma, that land she herself parted away willingly. She stated that she had given land to Uma by selling her half share into the same, and maintained that the money which she received from Nawab by selling the land was given by her to Uma. She maintained that on the date of the occurrence Uma had gone to her fathers house, because her re-marriage was not performed. She stated that she very well understand the dif ference between a country-made pistol, gun and rifle and stated that the country made pistol is of one and half Balist having a small barrel. The gun which was used in the occurrence in question was single bar rel. She was unable to state as to whether it was a country made or factory made. She did not know whether the gun was licensed one or not. She stated that she was provided with a police guard which remained with her for one year. She stated that when Sanjay and Ambrish were released on bail they went over her house at Khatauli where she was living after this incident. Because of the fear of these ac cused persons, she stopped going into the village. She came to Muzaffarnagar after the occurrence of this case along with police constable. She stated that at the time of occurrence Sanjay was aged about 19 years, Ambrish was elder to Sanjay by about one and half I/two years. Because of the fear of these ac cused persons, she stopped going into the village. She came to Muzaffarnagar after the occurrence of this case along with police constable. She stated that at the time of occurrence Sanjay was aged about 19 years, Ambrish was elder to Sanjay by about one and half I/two years. She took no steps for drawing any proceedings against Ambrish (obviously for Ambrish and Sanjays coming at her house at Khatauli after the occurrence of this case ). She refuted the suggestion of the defence on the point that she was telling a lie about the participation of Sanjay in the occur rence in question and stated that Sanjay was still roaming about around her house along with bad characters. 31. The aforesaid version of the cross-examination of this witness makes it ample clear that Smt. Anaro was a daring woman who did not lose her senses in spite of the deadly incident in which her husband and her three sons were done to death. The feeling of revenge being grave and hot at the time of incident, it is probable for us to believe that this daring lady in her wisdom, rightly thought of getting report about this occurrence scribed and then she took it herself along with Jabar Singh and her ser vant Surendra to police station. It was natural for her to have felt shocked and horrified after few hours when the police had arrived in the village to take care of the dead bodies and for the investigation of the case. Thus, there appears to be nothing unnatural in the conduct of this lady. It is a normal feature of the villages that the vil lagers go out to work in the fields during the day and the ladies of the house follow them after noon hours and return together with the male members of the family with crop or fodder etc. The month of occur rence being the month of early December, the sugarcane crop was ripe those days. The Agola is the leaf of this sugarcane. According to the statement of this witness her husband, one son and servant were there on the Buggi bringing the Agola, that is, the fodder portion of the sugarcane in her Buggi and her two sons and she were following the Buggi when this ghastly oc currence had happened. 32. The Agola is the leaf of this sugarcane. According to the statement of this witness her husband, one son and servant were there on the Buggi bringing the Agola, that is, the fodder portion of the sugarcane in her Buggi and her two sons and she were following the Buggi when this ghastly oc currence had happened. 32. Thus to us, the statement of this witness appears to be a truthful one and was rightly relied upon by the court below. 33. Coming to the evidence of second witness of fact Sri Jabar Singh (P. W 2), we find that he fully supported the case of the prosecution on the point of the date and time of the occurrence. He stated that at the time of the occurrence he was coming back to his house from his fields and when he entered into the village from towards the western side of the village, he heard the noise of gun shot. He stated that he found some people running away towards the east. He thereafter reached at the spot and came near the field of Antoo (deceased ). He stated that he found a number of vil lagers standing near the field of Kirnu (accused-appellant ). Anaro (P. W 1), her husband Ant Ram and the sons were com ing with a Buggi. Antoo and his son Jaivir as also servant were on Buggi. He stated that he found Antoo and Jaivir lying dead on the Buggi. The servant was also lying on Buggi. He stated that Anaro brought the Buggi to her house. He only resiled on the point of participation of the accused appellants in the occurrence of this case and refused to state that he saw the accused-ap pellants running away from the scene of occurrence and maintained that he did not see the assailants who opened fire. He stated during the course of his cross-ex amination by the State counsel that at the time of giving his statement on oath before the court below, he was lodged inside Muzaffarnagar Jail. Accused appellants Kirnu etc. were also lodged in that Jail. Thus, the possibility that he being inside jail, the accused-appellants prevailed upon this witness cannot be ruled out. Accused appellants Kirnu etc. were also lodged in that Jail. Thus, the possibility that he being inside jail, the accused-appellants prevailed upon this witness cannot be ruled out. The fact, however, remains that howsoever hostile this witness may be with regard to "the participation of the accused-appel lants in the occurrence of this case, he well corroborated the statement of Smi. Anaro on the point of date and time of the occur rence and on the point that her husband and son Jaivir were lying dead on the Buggi and that she was coming behind the Buggi. He also corroborated the statement of Smt. Anaro on the point that her servant was also lying injured over the Buggi. Thus, the fact that he refused to identify the accused persons and to connect them with the occurrence of this case remains of no consequence for the obvious reason that the accused-appellants of this case are well connected by the ocular evidence of Smt. Anaro (PW. 1) whose testimony as stated above appears to be a truthful one. 34. Coming on the third witness of occurrence viz. Surendra (P. W. 3), we find that at the time of the occurrence of this case he was working as a servant at the deceased Antoo. He fully supported the prosecution on the point that on the fate ful date of occurrence he and the deceased persons worked on the fields till 4. 30 p. m. and thereafter, after loading the Buggi, he along with the deceased Antoo and his sons started towards the house of the deceased. He clearly stated that he was driving the Buggi and deceased Antoo and his younger son were witting on the Bugti whereas two sons of the deceased, his wife Anaro were going behind the Buggi. He specifically stated that when at about 5. 00 p. m. he and the deceased persons reached near the field of Kirnu in village Ahrora, the accused-appellant Kirnu hrs two sons, Sanjay, Ambrish and two other persons came out. They were all armed with deadly weapons like Katta and opened fire upon the deceased and his three sons. He stated that he too sustained injuries in the occur rence of this case. Because of the fire made by the accused persons Antoo and his three sons had died on the spot. They were all armed with deadly weapons like Katta and opened fire upon the deceased and his three sons. He stated that he too sustained injuries in the occur rence of this case. Because of the fire made by the accused persons Antoo and his three sons had died on the spot. He there after went to the police station along with Anaro (P. W. 1 ). He stood well the test of cross-examination and nothing could be extracted by the learned counsel for the defence during the course of his cross-ex amination which may go to reflect that the eye-witness account which this witness has given is not correct. He very correctly iden tified accused-appellant Kirnu, Ambrish, Rakesh and Sanjay before the trial Judge and very well connected them with the occurrence in question. 35. The circumstances that he too sustained fire arm injury in the occurrence of this case which injuries were duly ex amined right on the night of the occur rence at about 9. 30 p. m. by Doctor Satish Kumar (P. W. 6), Medical Officer of Com munity Health Centre, Jansath lend as surance to the presence of this witness on spot. When this witness was working as a servant at the house of the deceased, it was a very natural conduct of a servant to have worked during the date on the fields and then after bringing Buggi from the house of the deceased, to have taken away the deceased persons on the said Buggi to their house. As his luck would have it this wit ness sustained a lacerated wound of entry and exit only in his right arm and escaped from the fatal consequence. Thus, the evidence of this witness appears to be quite trustworthy and was rightly relied upon by the learned trial Judge. 36. Now judging the ocular evidence of these three witnesses of fact in the light of the medical evidence of three doctors viz. Dr. S. K. Bansal (P. W. 4), Dr. J. R. Jilani (P. W. 5) and Doctor Satish Kumar (P. W. 6), we find no infirmity or inconsistency in the ocular evidence of these witnesses of fact. 37. Coming to the defence version that the accused-appellants were innocent and were falsely implicated in this case, we would like to observe that this defence version has got no legs to stand. 37. Coming to the defence version that the accused-appellants were innocent and were falsely implicated in this case, we would like to observe that this defence version has got no legs to stand. It would suffice to state here that whereas accused Kirnu and Ambrish denied, their relation ship with Subhash who is said to be the son-in-law of the accused-appellant Kirnu, Sanjay the minor son of Kirnu very much admitted in his examination under Section 313, Cr. P. C. that Subhash was related to him as Banhoi. 38. Thus, to sum up we find that the greed for land and litigation on that score which was going on in between the ac cused-appellant Kirnu and deceased Ant Ram afforded a well founded motive to the accused-appellant to eliminate the entire family of deceased Ant Ram and that with that object in view Kirnu alongwith his sons Ambrish and Sanjay, son-in-law Sub-hash and two others viz. Rakesh and Narendra formed an unlawful assembly on 4-12-1992 and in prosecution of the com mon object of the said unlawful assembly they armed themselves with deadly wea pons like gun and country made pistol and committed the ghastly murder of Ant Ram and his three sons Jaivir, Kalloo and Omvir who were then aged 16. 18&20 years respectively and in this way the accused-appellant eliminated the entire family of Ant Ram leaving Smt. Anaro, the widow of Ant Ram who escaped unhurt because she concealed herself under the Buggi. 39. Under the circumstances, we up hold the finding of fact regarding the guilt of the accused-appellant punishable under Sections 148/307/302/149, I. P. C. as recordedbythe trialjudge. 40. Coming on the point of sentence, we find that the specific case of accused Sanjay was that he was a minor on the date of occurrence of this case, therefore, the learned trial Judge after perusing his High School Certificate and Transfer Certificate and other evidence reached 10 the con clusion that the date of birth of Sanjay was 20-6-78. The occurrence having taken place on 4-12-92, his age on the date of occurrence of this case would come to about fourteen and half years. That being so, he was obviously minor on the date of occurrence and was entitled to the benefit of the provisions of Children Act and was not liable to be sent to jail to serve out the substantive sentences of imprisonment. That being so, he was obviously minor on the date of occurrence and was entitled to the benefit of the provisions of Children Act and was not liable to be sent to jail to serve out the substantive sentences of imprisonment. 41. As regards the sentence of death inflicted by the learned trial Judge upon the accused-appellants Kirnu, Ambrish and Rakesh, we find that although the accused-appellants were responsible for eliminating the entire family of Ant Ram by intentionally committing the murder of the Ant Ram and his three sons, yet the present case in our opinion does not come within the category of rarest of the rare case and does not satisfy the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court for inflicting death penalty. 42. Under the circumstances, we are of the opinion that it will meet the ends of justice if the sentence of death inflicted by the learned trial Judge upon the accused-appellant Kirnu, Ambrish and Rakesh under Sections 302/14, I. P. C is converted in to life imprisonment. As regards senten ces inflicted by the learned trial Judge for the offences punishable under Section 148, IPC for three years R. I. and under Ss. 307/149, IPC for seven years R. I. and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of the pay ment of the same to further under go R. I. for two years which sentences were made to run concurrently they warrant no inter ference. Thus, criminal reference regard ing the confirmation of death sentence is rejected and the sentence of death is con verted into that of imprisonment for life. 43. The criminal appeal No. 461 of 1998 preferred by Kirnu and Ambrish and Criminal Appeal No. 453 of 1998 preferred by Rakesh are hereby dismissed. Their conviction of sentences as recorded by the trial Judge under Sections 148/307/149, I. P. C is maintained but their sentences under Sections 302/149, I. P. C. is converted into life imprisonment. The ac cused-appellants are in jail. Let them serve out the sentences according to law. Refer ence for confirmation of death sentence is rejected. 44. As regards the criminal revision No. 427 of 1998 preferred by Smt. Anaro against the accused Sanjay, we find that the said revision is misconceived for the reason that the learned trial Judge never recorded a finding of acquittal as against this accused. Refer ence for confirmation of death sentence is rejected. 44. As regards the criminal revision No. 427 of 1998 preferred by Smt. Anaro against the accused Sanjay, we find that the said revision is misconceived for the reason that the learned trial Judge never recorded a finding of acquittal as against this accused. Rather he recorded a specific finding holding the accused Sanjay also guilty for the offences punishable under Sections 148/307/302/149, I. P. C. That being so, and Sanjay being a child of four teen and half years of age on the date of occurrence of this case, he was rightly given the benefit of provisions of Children Act. This revision is accordingly dismissed. Let a copy of this judgment be kept on the record of each case viz. Criminal Reference, Criminal Appeals and Crimi nal Revision. The record of the case as also a copy of this judgment be sent to the court below for needful action into the matter according to law. Decided accordingly.