A. PASAYAT, J. ( 1 ) THESE two appeals from Jail have been filed by Bani alias Banamali Pradhan and Madhab Pradhan (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') by their respective names. They question legality of judgment passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Berhampur, convicting them for offences punishable under Section 302 read with 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'i. P. C. '), and separately holding accused Banam and Madhab guilty of offences punishable under Sections 323 and 326, I. P. C. respectively. Each of the accused was sentenced for imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34, I. P. C. but no separate sentence was awarded for other offences in each case in view of the life sentence imposed. ( 2 ) PROSECUTION version as unfolded during trial is essentially as follows : Hari Pradhan (hereinafter called 'deceased') was the elder brother of Arjuna Pradhan, the informant and Babi Pradhan (P. W. 5 ). There was dispute over the possession of a piece of land locally known as "belandhia Padar". On 1-7-1992, the fateful day, deceased Arjuna and Babi went to the land for agricultural operation. After sometime, Chhaya Pradhan (widow of the deceased) Sara and Bilas, the wives of Arjuna and Babi respectively went there, bringing food for them. Chhaya returned to the house being asked by the deceased. Thereafter, the deceased and his two brothers took their food and started agricultural operation again. Babi went to a nearby field at a distance of about 25 cubits and started to plough the same. Deceased started digging the earth from the land and Arjuna started putting the earth on the ridge to raise the height thereof. While they were so engaged, the accused Bani alias Banamali Pradhan armed with an axe, and accused Madhaba Pradhan holding a bamboo lathi came to the spot shouting to finish them all. All of a sudden, Bani gave a blow by the sharp side of the axe which he was holding to the left side neck of the deceased, as a result of which, he sustained bleeding injury. Immediately, thereafter, he gave another blow by the sharp side of the axe to the face of deceased who fell down on being assaulted. Seeing the assaults, Arjuna rushed to protect his brother. Immediately, thereafter, he gave another blow by the sharp side of the axe to the face of deceased who fell down on being assaulted. Seeing the assaults, Arjuna rushed to protect his brother. Seeing this, accused Madhaba gave few blows to him by the lathi, resulting in injuries on his head, right leg and right hand. Despite the assaults, he grappled with accused Bani to prevent him from making further assaults. Seeing this, accused Madhaba snatched away the axe from the hands of accused Bani, and gave blows to the face of the deceased by the sharp side of the axe. Seeing the occurrence, Bilasa and Bara raised hulla, hearing which Babi rushed to the spot. He tried to lift the deceased in order to tend him. At that time, accused Madhaba tried to give a blow by the sharp side of the axe to the head of Babi which was obstructed by him by his left hand. The handle of the axe hit his left hand and he sustained swelling injury. In order to save himself. Babi picked up a wooden instrument which was lying at the spot, and started to whirl it. Bilas helped Arjuna and brought him to the place where one Kabi Das and Bansi Das were ploughing. Accused Bani rushed to the said place with an axe to assault him, which was protested by Kabi Das and Bansi Das. Thereafter, Bani went away from that place. Arjuna and Babi came back with a bullock-cart to the place along with Ganga Naik and several co-villagers. By that time, deceased had breathed his last. His dead-body was carried to the village. Arjuna came to the village Jagannath Prasad Out-post and lodged report. Investigation was undertaken and on completion thereof, charge-sheet was submitted. ( 3 ) ACCUSED persons pleaded innocence. On the contrary they took the stand that they were in possession of the land in question and had raised crop. On the date of occurrence, the informant and his brothers damaged the said crop by ploughing over the land. As they raised protest, the informant and his brother assaulted them and severe injuries resulted. On the report of accused Bani, charge-sheet was submitted against Arjuna and Babi, and a counter case was registered. The cases were taken up one after the other. ( 4 ) TWELVE witnesses were examined by the prosecution to prove its case. As they raised protest, the informant and his brother assaulted them and severe injuries resulted. On the report of accused Bani, charge-sheet was submitted against Arjuna and Babi, and a counter case was registered. The cases were taken up one after the other. ( 4 ) TWELVE witnesses were examined by the prosecution to prove its case. Arjuna (P. W. 1) while claiming to be eye-witness stated to have sustained injuries during the occurrence. Bilasa Pradhan (P. W. 6) and Bansi Das (P. W. 8) were also stated to be eye-witnesses to the occurrence. Placing reliance on their version, learned trial Judge found the accused persons guilty, and convicted and sentenced them as aforesaid. A reference was made to the evidence of Trinath Pradhan (P. W. 11) before whom, it was claimed, the deceased made a dying declaration pointing out to the accused persons to be the authors' of the crime. ( 5 ) IN support of the appeal, learned counsel for the appellants submitted that discrepancies have been noticed by the learned trial Judge as to the variance between the First Information Report, and the evidence in Court. It is stated that the so-called eye-witnesses were related to the deceased. Their evidence was tainted with the interestedness. The so-called dying declaration is also not plausible as the same was an omission to state the relevant details as to who was the author of the crime and the manner of assault, if any. The learned counsel for the State, however, supported the judgment of the trial Court. ( 6 ) COMING to the plea that the First Information Report is deficient in details, it has to be noted that the same is not a substantive piece of evidence and is not supposed to be an encyclopaedia of the factual aspects. Its use is limited for the purpose of testing the veracity of the statement made by its author. When details given in the First Information Report and the evidence in Court are compared, it is seen that minor details have been left out. But that does not in any manner corrode the credibility of the prosecution version. ( 7 ) COMING to the plea that the witnesses were related to the deceased, it has to be noted that there is no law which requires that the evidence of the relative witnesses has to be viewed with suspicion. But that does not in any manner corrode the credibility of the prosecution version. ( 7 ) COMING to the plea that the witnesses were related to the deceased, it has to be noted that there is no law which requires that the evidence of the relative witnesses has to be viewed with suspicion. Where interestedness is pleaded it has to be established. The Court has to make an effort to find out whether there is an attempt to rope in an innocent person. Normally, a relative would not rope in an innocent person and shield the actual culprit. The evidence of the witnesses who claimed to be eye-witnesses has been elaborately analysed by the learned trial Judge and we find no infirmity in their evidence to warrant rejection. ( 8 ) SO far as the dying declaration is concerned, it is to be noted that Trinath Pradhan (P. W. 11) on being asked Babi Pradhan (P. W. 5) came to the spot. He found Hari who had sustained severe bleeding injuries on his neck and face lying there. He tied a napkin on Hari's neck. With much difficulty, he told him that the accused Bani had assaulted on his neck and Madhaba assaulted on his face and further told him that he would not survive any more and thereafter, he could not speak any more. The last words spoken by the deceased clearly implicate the accused. There is no reason as to why Trinath Pradhan (P. W. 11) a co-villager would falsely implicate the accused persons. Though a suggestion was given that he is related to the accused as indicated above there is no reason for his telling a falsehood, as the accused person is also his relation. ( 9 ) A last attempt was made to submit that Section 34, I. P. C. has no application to the facts of the one. The plea is without any substance. Accused persons, as narrative facts would go to show, came with deadly weapons and as soon as they came assault were made. Accused Madhab did not stop after the deceased has fallen-down. He received fatal injury on his neck by the axe blow of Bani, and further blows to the face. The axe blows were given with such force that there was loss of 12 teeth and fracture of maxilla and mandible as well as compression fracture of nasal bone. Accused Madhab did not stop after the deceased has fallen-down. He received fatal injury on his neck by the axe blow of Bani, and further blows to the face. The axe blows were given with such force that there was loss of 12 teeth and fracture of maxilla and mandible as well as compression fracture of nasal bone. Section 34, I. P. C. is clearly applicable to the facts of the present case. So far as the offence under Sections 323 and 326, I. P. C. are concerned, as fastened on the two accused persons are concerned, the evidence on record clearly establishes the case. We find no infirmity in the judgment of the learned trial Judge to warrant interference. ( 10 ) IN the result, the appeals are dismissed. ( 11 ) S. C. DATTA, J. : -. I agree. Appeal dismissed. .