JUDGMENT - D.K. TRIVEDI, J.:---During hearing it was brought to our notice that in Criminal Appeal No. 974 of 1977 the sole appellant Jal Naval Madan and in Criminal Appeal No. 445 of 1978 the sole appellant Dattaram Narayan Samant, have expired, hence Criminal Appeal Nos. 974 of 1977 and 445 of 1978 are abated. Remaining three appeals being Criminal Appeal Nos. 888, 889 and 890 all of 1977 are filed by different accused who were convicted by common judgment by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Mumbai. There were two sessions trials before the Additional Sessions Judge and they were clubbed together. In Sessions Case No. 205/73 there were 75 accused and in Sessions Case No. 504/74 there was only one accused by name Babla @ Dhaku Kesu Parab. For the sake of convenience we are referring to accused Babla @ Dhaku Kesu Parab as "accused No. 76", though he is the only accused in the sessions case. The common judgment was delivered on 17-8-1977. 2. Out of the 76 accused only 39 accused preferred these three remaining appeals and they are original accused Nos. 4, 6, 11, 12, 15, 23, 28, 34, 35, 37, 41, 43, 44, 45, 47, 49, 51, 52, 53, 55, 58, 60, 61, 62, 63, 66, 69, 72, 73, 76 (in Criminal Appeal No. 888/77), accused Nos. 7, 9, 20, 27, 56, 64, 70 and 71 (in Criminal Appeal No. 890/77), and accused No. 3 in Criminal Appeal No. 889/77 by name Fredrick Lawrence Mathais. 3. All these accused who are before us as appellants have been convicted under different sections of the Indian Penal Code and most of them have been convicted on more than 12 counts. 4. At the outset of her arguments Mrs. Manjula Rao, the learned Counsel for all the appellants in all the three appeals contended that considering the fact that the incident is of 1972 though the judgment was delivered in 1977 and the appeals filed in 1977 coming for hearing in 1999 and considering the ages of the accused at the relevant time with their advanced ages at this juncture, she was confining herself only to the point of sentence and while taking us through the evidence she is not in a position to support prayer for acquittal of the appellants-accused. Considering the stand taken by Mrs. Considering the stand taken by Mrs. Rao and as she is not challenging the order of conviction and only concentrating on the point of sentence, learned Prosecutors also looking to the fact and considering the incident that occurred on 2-9-1972 and that appellant-accused are already released on bail or settled in their lives, that the learned Prosecutors have not seriously objected the prayer of the accused that the sentence undergone by them is sufficient and that the Court may accept the request of Mrs. Rao. 5. However, Mrs. Rao while arguing the matter has distinguished the case of accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais from rest of the accused. So far the other accused-appellants are concerned, she contended that they were sentenced on different counts by the Sessions Court and even the total period of sentence awarded to each accused was more than 15-20 years. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently and consequently the accused were required to undergo sentence for maximum period of 4 years 11 months and 15 days (so far as accused No. 44 is concerned) to a minimum period of 8 months and 12 days. She submitted a chart in that regard giving the name of the appellant, number of the accused, their present age, their period in custody and the remaining sentence which they will have to undergo if their convictions and sentences are upheld by this Court. She therefore contended that considering the lapse of time i.e. more than 22 years for the appeals to come up for final hearing, considering the ages of the accused at the relevant time and at present, and considering the fact that because of the conviction and the incident, all of them have lost their jobs and also their houses, she prayed that period of sentence was liable to be restricted to the period already undergone. In other words, according to her even if the convictions are maintained the accused should not be made to undergo further period of sentence in prison and the sentence undergone by them or the periods spent in custody by them as shown in the chart should be sufficient to meet the ends of justice. We are reproducing the said chart because of this particular submission. Appeal No. 888/77 Appe- O/A Name Pres Period Remaining Rem- llant No. ent in Sentence arks No. Age Custody 1. We are reproducing the said chart because of this particular submission. Appeal No. 888/77 Appe- O/A Name Pres Period Remaining Rem- llant No. ent in Sentence arks No. Age Custody 1. 4 Keshav A. Desai 43 03-09-29 00-02-01 2. 6 Krishna R. Joshi 35 03-05-25 00-06-05 3. 11 Farookh Khan 52 00-08-12 03-03-18 4. 12 Baliram Nagotkar 27 00-08-12 03-03-18 5. 15 Vasudeo Dalvi 27 04-11-15 Nil 6. 23 Amritlal S. Panchal 21 00-08-12 03-03-18 7. 28 Dayalal M. Panchal 42 00-08-12 03-03-18 8. 34 Ganpat Soma Naik 41 Dead 9. 35 Keshav N. Panchal 32 Dead 10. 37 Ramsukh Gajju Patel 45 03-05-29 00-06-01 11. 41 Amritlal P. Panchal 32 00-08-12 03-03-18 12. 43 Anil Sakharam Parab 23 00-10-02 03-01-28 13. 44 Mohan Bandopant Patil 30 04-11-15 Nil 14. 45 Marouf Khan F. Khan 25 03-00-05 00-11-25 15. 47 Raghunath J. Kamat 28 00-08-08 03-03-22 16. 49 Hamid Suleman Issak 24 00-08-08 03-03-22 17. 51 Anant Tukaram Shinde 26 02-11-25 01-00-05 18. 52 Bhausaheb B. Karpe 27 03-05-26 00-06-04 19. 53 Babuldas K. Panchal 38 00-08-08 03-03-22 20. 55 Sherkhan K. Shaikh 30 04-11-11 Nil 21. 58 Arun Anant Kokane 26 02-11-25 01-00-05 22. 60 Jerome Istu Pereira 24 00-08-06 03-03-24 23. 61 Krishna T. Kandalgaonkar29 03-05-19 00-06-11 24. 62 Pratap Laxman Lad 25 Dead 25. 63 Dilp Laxman Lad 26 26. 66 Jagannath Hari Patel 34 02-11-19 01-00-11 27. 69 Arvind Vishnu Matkar 31 00-07-25 03-04-05 28. 72 Mussa Kasam Shaikh 40 03-04-09 00-07-21 29. 73 Shashikant B. Patil 40 00-06-20 03-05-20 30. 76 Babhla Parab 43 02-11-12 01-00-18 Appeal No. 890/77 1. 7 Dattaram P. Mungekar 37 03-05-22 00-06-05 Dead 2. 9 Janardhan Manjrekar 40 04-11-15 Nil 3. 20 Ramsumer Karmi 52 00-08-12 03-03-18 Dead 4. 27 Khemchand P. Panchal 28 02-11-29 01-00-01 8. 71 Ganpat B. Wadekar 24 02-10-09 01-01-21 9. 70 Rouf Khan Farag Khan 27 Dead Appeal No. 889/77 3. Fredrick Mathais 40 Life So far as age of the accused is concerned, we verified their age from the statement of the accused under section 313 recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge and that part relating to age of each respective accused is taken from those statements. 6. 70 Rouf Khan Farag Khan 27 Dead Appeal No. 889/77 3. Fredrick Mathais 40 Life So far as age of the accused is concerned, we verified their age from the statement of the accused under section 313 recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge and that part relating to age of each respective accused is taken from those statements. 6. She also pointed out that out of the 76 original accused, accused No. 7 Dattaram Pandurang Manjekar, accused No. 20 Ramsumer Karmi, accused No. 34 Ganpat Soma Naik, accused No. 53 Keshav Narayan Panchal, accused No. 56 Shankar Vithal Savardekar, accused No. 61 Krishna Tukaram Kandalgaonkar, accused No. 63 Dilip Laxman Lad and accused No. 70 Rouf Khan Farag Khan were dead during the pendency of the appeal and therefore the appeals against these accused abated. During hearing Mrs. Rao has also pointed out that out of 76 original accused, accused No. 1 Dattaram Narayan Samant and accused No. 29 Jal Naval Madan who have challenged the order of conviction and sentence by preferring separate appeals being Criminal Appeal No. 974/77 and 445/78 have expired. As both these appellants-accused had expired, their appeals stand accordingly abated. 7. When these submissions regarding the death of certain appellants were made, we asked the learned Public Prosecutors to verify these facts but inspite of giving them time, they were unable to verify the fact of death of these accused through the concerned Police Stations and they made a statement that since the families of the dead accused were not found residing at the addresses given to the police at the time of filing charge sheet or during investigation, it was not possible to trace the family members of those accused. However, since the Counsel for the accused has made statement regarding the death of the accused on the basis of the information and instructions given to her by the members of the Union to which all the accused appellant belonged and since statement is coming from the appellants Counsel in their own appeal we are accepting that statement and therefore the appeal against those accused, who are reported to be dead stand abated. 8. So far as accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is concerned, he has been sentenced to life imprisonment under section 302 of the I.P.C. for causing the murder of P.I. Chandgude. According to Mrs. 8. So far as accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is concerned, he has been sentenced to life imprisonment under section 302 of the I.P.C. for causing the murder of P.I. Chandgude. According to Mrs. Rao even if the prosecution case as it is accepted, role attributed to accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais was that he assaulted P.I. Chandgude with a 'farshi-kurad' and caused only one injury on the shoulder of P.I. Chandgude. On the basis of the evidence given by doctors who examined P.I. Chandgude while he was admitted in an unconscious condition and who survived in the hospital only for 15 minutes, and on the basis of the post mortem notes, she contended that cause of death of P.I. Chandgude was fracture on skull and since the case of the prosecution was not that it was this accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais who caused any injury on any other part of the body of P.I. Chandgude, the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais could not be held guilty under section 302 of the I.P.C. According to her, the injury on the shoulder which was caused by accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais as per the prosecution case could not have caused or was not responsible for the death of P.I. Chandgude and therefore at the most the offence that could be made out against accused No. 3 was one under section 326 of the I.P.C. and hence the conviction of accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais was liable to be converted from section 302 to 326 of the I.P.C. So far as the sentence part is concerned, she contended that at present the accused was of about 62 years of age, that he was suffering from heart problem, that he has already undergone sentence for 5 years and 2 months and therefore considering all these factors and the fact of loss of service and loss of residential accommodation in Godrej Company Compound where the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais along with other accused was residing, the sentence already undergone would be sufficient so far as accused No. 3 was concerned. Therefore, she contended that the conviction of accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais should be altered to section 326 of I.P.C. and he should be let off on the sentence already undergone by him for 5 years and 2 months. 9. Therefore, she contended that the conviction of accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais should be altered to section 326 of I.P.C. and he should be let off on the sentence already undergone by him for 5 years and 2 months. 9. On the other hand it was contended by the learned Prosecutors so far as accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is concerned that, it was not that accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais was merely convicted under section 302 of I.P.C. but he was also convicted for taking part in the riot, for being a member of an unlawful assembly and for throwing stones and assaulting police officers and participating in the riots individually and collectively and therefore he was convicted under different heads of the I.P.C. and therefore considering this role in the riot and also considering the fact that this injury on the shoulder of P.I. Chandgude as per the opinion of the doctor had resulted in profuse bleeding and was fatal and therefore according to them firstly even if the conviction of the accused No. 3 was converted from section 302 the accused was liable to be sentenced for life imprisonment under section 326 of I.P.C. where the punishment is so prescribed. 10. It was further submitted by them that P.I. Chandgude was discharging his official duty and he was trying to quench and quell the ferocious mob of hundred of workers which included the accused and even though he had a revolver, P.I. Chandgude had not used it exercising restraint, but because of the blow given by the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais on the shoulder that P.I. Chandgude was incapacitated and he could not use the revolver as a result of which he was assaulted and had to die on the spot. Therefore, according to the prosecution this is not a case to show any leniency to the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais so far as sentence is concerned even if his conviction is altered. 11. Therefore, according to the prosecution this is not a case to show any leniency to the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais so far as sentence is concerned even if his conviction is altered. 11. Secondly, it was contended by the learned Prosecutors that it might be that the age of the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais at present is 62 years but so far as his illness on account of heart ailment is concerned, no sufficient proof was given by the appellant to the Court and the medical certificate that was produced was not at all satisfactory nor did it show that accused No. 3 was suffering from heart ailment since number of years. It was also contended by them that if accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais as like others had to loose his job in the Godrej Factory and his house also it was not because of the conviction of the accused, but because of his participation in the riot. 12. The learned Prosecutors submitted that the unlawful assembly not only indulged in pelting stones on Shiv Sainiks but also indulged in setting fire to police vans, assaulting Police Officers, using stick, iron bars, soda water bottles, stones and weapons like axes for deterring the Police Officers from discharging their duties. It was also pointed out that two Police Officers, namely, P.I. Chandgude and Head Constable Rane had to die on account of brutal attack of all these accused and one more worker was also required to die, therefore considering the totality of the circumstances, the learned Prosecutors contended that firstly accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais should be sent to suffer R.I. for life under section 326 of I.P.C. or in the alternative the punishment cannot be and should not be less than 10 years as is prescribed by section 326 of I.P.C. The learned Prosecutors strongly opposed the plea of Mrs. Rao that accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais should be let off on sentence already undergone i.e. 5 years and 2 months if he is to be convicted under section 326 of the I.P.C. 13. Mrs. Rao has relied upon certain judgments of the Supreme Court, wherein while converting the sentence or while convicting the accused under section 326 of I.P.C., the Supreme Court has awarded lesser sentence and had allowed accused to be let off on the sentence already undergone. Mrs. Rao has relied upon certain judgments of the Supreme Court, wherein while converting the sentence or while convicting the accused under section 326 of I.P.C., the Supreme Court has awarded lesser sentence and had allowed accused to be let off on the sentence already undergone. On the other hand the learned Prosecutors relied upon a judgment of the Supreme Court reported in A.I.R. 1991 S.C. 1462 (Sheopujan Chamar and others v. State of Bihar)1, wherein even though the accused was 70 years of age and the appeal before the Supreme Court had come after 12 years sentence of the accused was maintained by the Supreme Court. Relying upon this judgment, the learned Prosecutors contended that pendency of the appeal for 22 years could not be considered a ground so far as this accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is concerned. Because according to them it was no fault of the prosecution or of the victims who died in the incident including P.I. Chandgude that the appeals came for hearing after 22 years. They therefore vehemently urged that firstly accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais should be sentenced to life under section 326 of I.P.C. or in the alternative the sentence should not be less than 10 years in any case. 14. The history giving rise to the out break of unlawful assembly and rioting on 2-9-1972 have been given in detail by the learned trial Judge in his lengthy judgment from paragraphs 4 to 21, since the submissions have been made by Mrs. Rao only in respect of the sentence, we do not feel it necessary to reproduce those facts in the present judgment. 15. It was submitted by Mrs. Rao that accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais cannot be held guilty for causing the murder of P.I. Chandgude and cannot be convicted under section 302 because even according to the prosecution and the witnesses examined in that regard including the doctor who performed the postmortem apart from other injuries on the person of P.I. Chandgude, there was one injury on his left shoulder which the eye witness have attributed to accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais as being an injury caused with the help of farshi-kurad. We have no hesitation in accepting the submission of Mrs. We have no hesitation in accepting the submission of Mrs. Rao because even though the doctor performing postmortem has given description of the injury and opined that this injury has resulted in profins bleeding and the same was fatal, the injury was not likely to cause death in every case. The exact evidence of the Doctor Pai (P.W. No. 76) has described the injuries on the deceased P.I. Chandgude in all as under:- "It is the evidence of Dr. Pai (P.W. No. 76) that he had performed the post-mortem on the body of S.G.S.I. Chandgude and he found the following external injuries: (1) An injury 5"x 2½" where the bone was exposed, the bone being the head of the humerus. According to him, the wound was classified as an Incise wound and could be caused by a heavy weapon, which was not blunt but was not very sharp. (2) CLW left parieto temporal region 2.5" x 1/4" x muscle deep. (3) CLW 1" x 1/3" left parieto temporal region below Injury No. 2. (4) Bleeding from left ear. Bleeding from nostrils and from the gums. (5) Multiple contusions and abrasions on the face and forehead on left side, left ear and left upper extremity. (6) Fracture of the left side of maxilla. (7) Minor abrasions on the left knee (laterally). (8) Minor abrasions of the left mid part of leg anteriorily. (9) Black eye, more on the left side than the right side. He further found the following internal injuries. Scalp- There were haematomas in the layers of scalp on the left side. Skull.---(1) Depressed fracture on left parieto temporal region of size 2.5" x 1" x width 1/3" depression and maximum depression being ½". (2) Extensive fracture of left orbital plate with internal orbital haemorrhage. (3) Fracture on right arbitral plate. (4) Fracture left wing of sphehold and anterior part of petrous of temporal bone. That he also found in the head, scalp, skull and brain the following:---(1) Subdural haematoma about 20oc. (2). That was marked subarachonid haenorrhage all over the brain. (3) Contusion of left parieto temporal part of brain exterior post, and anterior to occipital lobe and frontal lobe. (4) Contusion of right temporal lobe (5) Blood stained in lateral ventricles. That the lungs were marked by congested and slightly oedematus and contusions on left lower lobe posteriorly, cut surface congestion and slight pulmonary oedema. (3) Contusion of left parieto temporal part of brain exterior post, and anterior to occipital lobe and frontal lobe. (4) Contusion of right temporal lobe (5) Blood stained in lateral ventricles. That the lungs were marked by congested and slightly oedematus and contusions on left lower lobe posteriorly, cut surface congestion and slight pulmonary oedema. So far as injury No. 1 on the shoulder is concerned, doctor has stated in his evidence as under: "According to Dr. Pai (P.W. No. 76) the external Injury No. 1 which appeared on the shoulder tip was clean cut wound from the front to behind or vice versa with widely gaping edges and contusions around. That this injury could have been caused by an axe or things like an axe or by a bar with a sharp edge on one side and a blunt edge on the other or the mid-part of a sickle which is a little blunt. That it could also be caused by the edge of a spade (Fauda) or a Kurad (i.e. axe). That an injury, such as this, could also be caused by weapons, such as appear in the lower plate of the photograph appearing on Page 244 of Modi's Medical Jurisprudence, 16th Edn. Dr. Pai (P.W. No. 76) has stated that the said injury could be caused by one blow and would necessarily be a bleeding injury, and that the person must have bled profusely. That it could also cause haemorrhage and result in a shock. That the injury would not ordinarily cause death, but it could prove fatal, in other words, according to Dr. Pai, the injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death." 16. From the aforesaid evidence, it will be clear that even though in the opinion of Dr. Pai the injury has resulted in xxx bleeding which in medical terminology means profuse bleeding and the injury was fatal. He has further opined that injury was not likely to cause death in the ordinary circumstance. It is true that P.I. Chandgude died on the spot, but that was mainly as a result of injuries on its head which resulted in the fracture of skull. However, the prosecution has not been able to attribute those injuries to these accused neither it is their case. It is true that P.I. Chandgude died on the spot, but that was mainly as a result of injuries on its head which resulted in the fracture of skull. However, the prosecution has not been able to attribute those injuries to these accused neither it is their case. The persons who has caused injuries on the head of P.I. Chandgude were not joined accused in the trial. 17. No doubt it is true that in an unlawful assembly when accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais inflicted the fatal blow on the shoulder he can also be held responsible for the acts of others. However, in the absence of any evidence in that regard i.e. as to who were the assailants, how many were they, what weapons they has used for causing the injuries on the head of P.I. Chandgude, it would not be proper to convict accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais for the murder of P.I. Chandgude. Therefore, we do not concur with the findings of the trial Court that accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is guilty of offence under section 302 for causing murder of P.I. Chandgude considering the medical evidence that we have gone through and the evidence of P.W. 3 Namdeo Mhatre, P.W. 2 Inspector Kadam, P.W. 9 Feku Tiwari, P.W. 13 Bansilal Lokhande and P.W. 40 Ramchandra Divekar. We are not discussing in detail about their evidence and we are not inclined to accept the submission of Mrs. Rao that the conviction recorded by the learned trial Judge convicting the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais for the offence under section 302 for committing murder of P.I. Chandgude is not proper and accordingly we are of the view that looking to the lethal weapon used by the original accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais and the force while giving blow to the deceased, the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is guilty for the offence under section 326 of the I.P.C. 18. As observed earlier, we mainly while converting the conviction for the offence under section 302 to section 326 of I.P.C. and the fact that even as per the prosecution evidence led by the prosecution witnesses admission of one blow given by the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais, it is positive that the appellant original accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais has given one blow on the shoulder of P.I. Chandgude, and as per the medical evidence discussed earlier the conviction of the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is altered from the offence under section 302 to section 326 of I.P.C. 19. Coming to the second part of the submissions of Mrs. Rao i.e. regarding sentence to be given to accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais for offence under section 326 of I.P.C., it was contended by her that this is not the case convicting the accused for life imprisonment because if the accused is acquitted under section 302 of I.P.C. and his life sentence is to be withdrawn then there would be no legal justification for sentencing him to life under section 326 of the I.P.C. She therefore contended that even though section 326 of the I.P.C. lays down that the accused can be sentenced to R.I. for 10 years, the fact that the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is now 62 years of age, that he is suffering from heart disease, that more than 22 years have elapsed from the date of his conviction till the final hearing of his appeal and that he has lost his job and home, this was a fit case to impose sentence of 5 years and 2 months which accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais had already undergone and not to impose any other or more sentence. 20. In support of her contentions, an affidavit of Gertude Fredrick Mathais- wife of the original accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais dated 4-10-1999 with Medical certificates of LTM Medical College And LTMG Hospital is filed to show that the original accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is a heart patient and he has such heart trouble since 1995 and he is taking treatment. It is further found that the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is suffering from severe blood pressure and diabetes for some years and as the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais had developed some pain in chest he was admitted in hospital at LTM Medical College And LTMG Hospital at Sion and the medical certificate issued by Dr. G.R. Kane, Professor and Head Department of Cardiology dated 30-9-1999 and as per the said certificate it is found that accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais admitted in cardiology department at the hospital with unstable angina on 30-9-1999 and he has undergone coronary angiography which shows extensive triple vessel disease and he needs coronary bypass surgery. The blood report of the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is also attached with the said affidavit. 21. Regarding these documents, mainly affidavit and the medical certificates, the learned Prosecutors contended that firstly sufficient time was not given to them to verify and secondly even if the certificates are accepted at their face value, this would not be a case to let off the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais only on the sentence undergone by him because the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais was a member of an unruly mob of about more than 1000 workers, all of them had indulged in riotous activities, assaulted police men on duties with stones, lethal weapons, soda water bottles and deadly weapons and as a part of the activities they had yielded and murdered P.I. Chandgude while on duty. The learned Prosecutors therefore contended that showing leniency to the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais would set a bad precedent for those taking law in their hands and an impression created in the society that even if the Police Officers are attacked and killed, no serious punishments are likely to be inflicted. 22. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made by Mrs. Rao, but we are not in agreement with her submissions. 22. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made by Mrs. Rao, but we are not in agreement with her submissions. Because even though the incident is of 1972 and the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais along with other accused might have lost his job, home or quarter provided to him by his employer and even though the appeal is coming for hearing after 22 years, the gravity and seriousness of the matter and the fact that two Police Officers were killed on the spot by the mob, of which the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais was a member and this accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais as well as all the accused before us were convicted and sentenced by the trial Court on more than 12 to 15 different counts, will itself show that the accused No. 3 Fredick Mathais cannot be awarded lesser than 10 years. Even if the ailment of the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is accepted from the certificates produced by him that cannot be a circumstance to impose sentence lesser than 10 years nor the circumstance to let off the accused on the sentence already undergone. If the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais is really suffering from heart ailment, proper and adequate medical treatment and care can be provided to him while he is in jail. 23. The other aspect of the matter as is rightly argued by the learned Prosecutors that the victim in the case was a Police Officer discharging his duty and from the discussions made above it is clear that even though P.I. Chandgude had a revolver with him, he had exercised restraint in not using it to quell or disburse the mob. To the contrary, it is revealed from the evidence that it was the blow given by this accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais that P.I. Chandgude could not use the revolver and became defenceless and fell on the ground in a condition where he could not defend himself which encouraged the other assailants who were before this Court to brutally assault and fracture his skull with other deadly weapons. Had the injury on the shoulder of P.I. Chandgude not caused by accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais the P.I. Chandgude might have survived by using his revolver. Had the injury on the shoulder of P.I. Chandgude not caused by accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais the P.I. Chandgude might have survived by using his revolver. The fact that P.I. Chandgude ran for his life after the assault atleast for some distance is supported by a map of the situation and the panchnama drawn which shows specific place from where the revolver is recovered as point 'N' and the holster of revolver was found at point 'H' and the body of P.I. Chandgude was found at some other point. Further, injury on the shoulder though not capable of causing death in an ordinary course was a fatal injury resulting in profuse bleeding and felling down of P.I. Chandgude in his defenceless condition. Considering therefore the circumstances of the case, riotous behaviour of the accused who were found guilty by the trial Court and also the fact that even this accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais has been found guilty under different provisions of the I.P.C. and on not less than 15 other counts, no sentence lesser than 10 years can be awarded to him, the submissions of Mrs. Rao are therefore liable to be rejected. 24. To conclude, we have heard Mrs. Rao and the learned Prosecutors only on the point of sentence regarding all the accused before us as the appellants excluding of course the appellants - accused who died and whose appeal are abated. Since no submissions were made on merits and no prayers were made for acquittal of the accused we have not considered the evidence in that perspective or with that angle. So far as the other appellants accused are concerned the pendency of the matter for more than 22 years, the fact that they have lost their jobs and houses and the age of the appellants - accused at the relevant time and at present, we think that ends of justice will be met if convictions of all the accused, excluding accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais, are maintained and sentence already undergone by them is awarded to them. We also make it clear that while considering the sentence to be awarded to the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais for 10 years under section 326 of I.P.C. we have taken into consideration the submissions of Mrs. We also make it clear that while considering the sentence to be awarded to the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais for 10 years under section 326 of I.P.C. we have taken into consideration the submissions of Mrs. Rao regarding pendency of the appeal, the age and ailment of the accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais and the fact that he has lost his house and job and therefore we are not inclined to award life sentence to accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais even though he is found guilty under section 326 of I.P.C. as insisted by the learned Prosecutors. 25. At this juncture, we must give compliments to Mrs. Rao for going through the bulky record of these appeals which ran into about 5000 pages and to assist us in appreciation of evidence and in shortest possible manner. We also give compliments to both the Prosecutors Mr. A.M. Shingapure and Mr. Pravin Singhal for rendering valuable assistance in disposing of these appeals quickly. Considering the bulky record and the way in which they have prepared and assisted this Court, we recommend that they are entitled to a special fee, over and above the regular fee which they are entitled for conducting these appeals, and as observed earlier looking to the bulky record both the Additional Public Prosecutors are entitled separately to a sum of Rs. 5,000/- each in addition to their regular fees which they will get. Additional fees of Rs. 5,000/-, which we recommend be paid to the respective Additional Public Prosecutors along with their regular bills. 26. In the result, we pass the following order: ORDER The sole appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 974/77 and 445/78 have expired hence their appeals stand abated. Remaining three appeals i.e. Criminal Appeal Nos. 888/77, 889/77 and 890/77 are partly allowed. The convictions of all the accused- appellants, whose appeals are not abetted by death are maintained (excluding accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais) and they are sentenced to the period already undergone. Naturally all the accused (excluding accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais) will not have to undergo any more sentence. Conviction of appellant- original accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais under section 302 of the I.P.C. is altered and he is convicted under section 326 of I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 10 (ten) years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default R.I. for 6 (six) months. Conviction of appellant- original accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais under section 302 of the I.P.C. is altered and he is convicted under section 326 of I.P.C. and sentenced to suffer R.I. for 10 (ten) years with fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default R.I. for 6 (six) months. Accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais to surrender before the Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai, within eight weeks of this order to undergo R.I. of the remaining period. His Appeal No. 889 of 1977 is thus partly allowed. The bail bond furnished by the appellant- original accused No. 3 Fredrick Mathais stands cancelled. Appeal No. 888/77 against appellant accused No. 8 Ganpat Soma Naik, No. 9 Keshavlal Narayan Panchal, No. 23 Krishna Tukaram Kandalgaonkar, and No. 25 Dilip Laxman Lad, and Appeal No. 890/77 against appellant-accused Nos. 1 Dattaram Pandurang Mungekar, No. 3 Ramsumer Ramprasad Kurmi, No. 5 Shankar Vithal Savardekar and No. 7 Rouskhan Faruqkhan stands abated on account of their death. Certified Copy expedited. Appeal partly allowed. -----