JUDGMENT A.S. Garg, J. - There is a rehri market near the crossing of the market of Sectors 10 & 15 of Panchkula where the fruit sellers park their rehris/fruit carts to enable them to display and dispose of their fruits. The hawkers/vendors duly obtain licences for parking of their rehris and running business from the Local authority like Municipalities. It was as back as on 17.11.1987 that one Rama Nand (PW4) had his rehri in the said market and another person Mohinder Singh (PW5) also had a rehri. They wanted to do their business in the front row so that they could attract customers easily and pick up their sale. Since they were having their rehris a bit on the back side, they were feeling that they had to return home without any income. Rama Nands brother Mahavir (deceased) had a Hotel just behind the rehri market. He was said to be selling and serving liquor also besides the fruits. So on the said date i.e. 16.11.1987 around 9.00 P.M. when the complainant (Rama Nand) and Mohinder Singh were talking with each other, a dispute arose amongst the accused and the complainant for bringing the rehri forward. Accused Arvind and Pun Pun alias Phun Phun who were close to the complainants rehri caught hold of the complainant. Accused Vidhur gave him a Balli blow which hit him on his fore-head on right side. His brother, Mahavir, now deceased rushed for his help. Accused Vidhur had wooden Balli in his hand while accused Abhey Kumar alias Abhey Singh was armed with Sabbal made of iron. The remaining accused were armed with lathis. They uttered that they would teach him a lesson for positioning the rehri ahead of them. After complainants brother Mahavir rushed for his help, accused Nirbhay, Vidhur and Arvind caught hold of him and accused Abhey gave a sabbal blow to Mahavir which hit him on his right Kanpatti. Mahavir fell down on receipt of this injury and started bleeding. All the accused then pounced upon Mahavir and gave him lathi blows. Ved Parkash and Mohinder Singh as also Dilbagh PWs intervened and rescued Mahavir from the accused assailants. Mohinder Singh and Ved Parkash carried on their avocation there. All the accused then fled away with their respective weapons. Mahavir fell down on receipt of this injury and started bleeding. All the accused then pounced upon Mahavir and gave him lathi blows. Ved Parkash and Mohinder Singh as also Dilbagh PWs intervened and rescued Mahavir from the accused assailants. Mohinder Singh and Ved Parkash carried on their avocation there. All the accused then fled away with their respective weapons. He and his brother were taken to the PGI, Chandigarh on a three-wheeler by Mohinder Singh and Ved Parkash and got them admitted there. Mahavir died at 5.30 P.M. on 17.11.1987. 2. Rama Nand made a statement Ex. PK before Assistant Sub Inspector Hans Raj (PW 11), who had made an endorsement Ex. PK/1 and sent the same to Police Station, Panchkula, where formal First Information Report Ex. PK/2 was recorded by Sub Inspector Maheshwar Singh. Special report reached the Illaqua Magistrate at 5.45 P.M. on 17.11.1987. Assistant Sub Inspector Hans Raj (PW 11) recorded proceedings under Section 174 of the Code of Criminal Procedure vide Ex.PX. He had taken into possession blood stained burshirt of the complainant Rama Nand through recovery memo Ex.PY, blood stained clothes consisting of Pajama, underwear and sweater of Mahavir vide recovery memo Ex.PZ and sent them to the office of Forensic Science Laboratory from where a report Ex.PEE was received showing that Pajama and burshirt (shirt) were found to be stained with numerous medium and small sized blood stains, while sweater was found with a few medium and small sized blood stains, traces of blood too small for serological tests were detected on underwear (Kachha). Results of serological analysis indicated that human blood was found but the group was inconclusive. Deputy Superintendent of Police Khan Chand (PW8) inspected the spot and prepared a rough site plan Ex.PN with correct notes. He also examined the witnesses Dilbag Singh, Ved Parkash and Mohinder Singh under Sections 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He arrested accused Arvind and Pun Pun alias Phun Phun on 19.11.1987 and they produced their weapons i.e. lathi and danda before him which were taken into possession vide memo Exs.PR and PQ. Sub Inspector Pala Ram (PW6) had arrested accused Abhay Singh and recorded disclosure statement and recovered a sabal through recovery memo Ex.PM/1. He has also prepared a rough site plan of the place of recovery of Sabal Ex. PM/2. Sub Inspector Pala Ram (PW6) had arrested accused Abhay Singh and recorded disclosure statement and recovered a sabal through recovery memo Ex.PM/1. He has also prepared a rough site plan of the place of recovery of Sabal Ex. PM/2. After completion of investigation all the accused were challaned for offences punishable under Sections 148/302/323 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code. Post-mortem of the deceased was conducted by Dr. Inderjit Dewan, Emeritus Professor of Anatomy and Forensic Medicines, PGI, Chandigarh (PW1), at 12.00 noon and found the following injuries on the person of the deceased : "1. An oblique lacerated wound on the occipital region of the scalp 2.5 x 0.5 cm deep to bone located just right and above the external occipital protuberance running from above downwards and somewhat to the right the upper end was 3.5 cm right of the middle line and lower end 4.6 cm right of external occipital protuberance. The right margin of the wound had irregular contusion 1 to 2 ml. Broad, left margin also had some contusion for a mm or so. 2. Two small abrasions 3"2, 5"1 mm on the back of right shoulder 16 cm right of middle line, 2 cm below and 4 cm medial to the outer margin of acromion. Operation wound 1. A vertial stitched operation wound 6 cm long in right temporal region in front of pinna. 2. A ? shaped stitched operation wound in left tempro parietal region 11 cm long. Fracture skull 1. An irregular fracture 3 cm long extending upwards from tinion and to the right and then forwards located under injury No. 1, over the upper posterior part of right parietal bone. 3. In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death was laceration of brain, extensive subdural haemotoma and extradural haematoma following fracture of skull due to head injury. In his opinion injury No. 1 was fatal and can cause the death. The post-mortem report is Ex. PB. Other injuries were too small to cause the death. 4. Rama Nand (PW4) was examined by Dr. Jimmy K. (PW2) Senior Resident, General Surgery, PGI, Chandigarh and he found one injury on his person : "1. 5 cm laceration over the right side of the forehead bone-deep. No clinical evidence of any fracture. 5. The injury was found to be simple in nature. The case summary of Rama Nand is Ex. PH. 6. Jimmy K. (PW2) Senior Resident, General Surgery, PGI, Chandigarh and he found one injury on his person : "1. 5 cm laceration over the right side of the forehead bone-deep. No clinical evidence of any fracture. 5. The injury was found to be simple in nature. The case summary of Rama Nand is Ex. PH. 6. Vidhur was tried by Juvenile Court separately, as he was below the age of 16 years. The four appellants were put to trial and they claimed themselves innocent. According to them there was a dispute in the hotel of the deceased. He used to serve liquor to some of his customers and had a dispute with them and received injuries at that place from those persons and the appellants were implicated falsely. 7. Still, the learned trial Judge convicted and sentenced the appellants rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence punishable under Section 148 Indian Penal Code. The Id. trial Judge further sentenced accused Abhey Kumar alias Abhey Singh to imprisonment for life for offence punishable under Section 302 Indian Penal Code and a fine of Rs. 2000/- Nirbhay, Arvind and Pun Pun were further sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 2000/- each for offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149. In default of payment of fine the accused shall undergo imprisonment for a period of six months each. Learned trial Judge further sentenced all the four accused to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months for offence punishable under Section 323 read with Section 149 Indian Penal Code. The substantive sentence of all the offences was ordered to run concurrently. The accused-appellants have challenged their conviction & sentence through the present appeal. 8. Without going into the unnecessary details and looking to a conceded position in the case, it may be stated that the appellants Arvind, Nirbhay and Pun Pun allegedly caught hold of the deceased when Abhey Kumar inflicted a sabbal blow on him. After going through the testimony of Rama Nand (PW), Mohinder Singh (PW5) and Ved Parkash (PW12), there remains no doubt that in such a posture sabbal blow possibly could not have been inflicted without injuring the persons who were allegedly holding the deceased. Moreover, these three appellants were allegedly having lathis with them and they could not hold the lathis as well as the deceased. Moreover, these three appellants were allegedly having lathis with them and they could not hold the lathis as well as the deceased. The situation mentioned as such makes it improbable and difficult for us to believe that these persons actually caught hold of Mahavir Prashad (deceased). It appears that the names of these appellants were mentioned out of party faction. We agree with the learned counsel for the appellants who has argued the case vis-a-vis the appellants at length and there appears to be no cogent argument in respect of their conviction. So we have no alternative but to consider the situation giving importance to the arguments that these persons appeared to be innocent. The principle of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus is not applicable. The grain has to be sifted from the cheff. 9. So as far as the involvement of Abhey appellant is concerned, there appears to be ample evidence in the statement of Rama Nand (PW4). He has mentioned the manner in detail how the occurrence had taken place. He has claimed that his brother Mahavir Prashad was hit with a sabbal by Abbey, appellant. He made a statement before the Police. He was also put to cross-examination. His statement was recorded about two years after the occurrence took place. The statement of Inspector in this case was recorded after six years of the occurrence. It was a delayed trial, Mohinder Singh (PW5) also deposed minutely that deceased was inflicted sabbal blows by Abhey-appellant. He too was examined at length. It is difficult for any person witnessing such an occurrence to say as to which of the shop was open and which of the shop was closed at the time of the occurrence. It is also difficult to mention as to whose statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer and at what time so on and so forth. A photographic view of the occurrence is difficult to be brought on record. The expectation of the defence would be really too much in such cases that the witnesses should be able to tell as to what was happening around them at the time of occurrence. It is true that Rama Nand is the real brother of the deceased but his version cannot be discarded on the ground that he is related to the victim. There also appears to be no delay in lodging the FIR. It is true that Rama Nand is the real brother of the deceased but his version cannot be discarded on the ground that he is related to the victim. There also appears to be no delay in lodging the FIR. The victims were poor people and it really becomes difficult for such person to successfully lodge a report. Rama Nand had fled away from the Hospital after his medico legal but it is not anywhere indicated that the appellant Abhey could be free from guilt. Therefore, in the said situation, the participation of the appellant Abhey is well proved from the statement of Rama Nand (PW4) and PW5 Mohinder Singh. Ved Parkash (PW12) had not much to say about it. Though his version corroborates the fact that the occurrence had taken place as such in which Abhey was involved. So with the aforesaid discussion we are of the view that the appeal qua Nirbhay, Arvind and Pun Pun is to be allowed and acquit them from the charges made against them. However, the appeal against Abhey Kumar alias Abhey Singh stands dismissed. Appeal Partly Allowed.