Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 190 (ALL)

Raja Ram Rampati v. State of U. P.

2001-02-23

J.C.GUPTA, M.A.KHAN

body2001
J. C. GUPTA, J. ( 1 ) APPELLANTS, named above, have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated 23-3-1985 passed in Session Trial No. 107 of 1984 passed by Sri S. K. Pandey, the then Additional Session Judge, Ballia, whereby they have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under S. 320 read with S. 149 I. P. C. Appellants Raja Ram and Ram Nath have been further convicted and sentenced to undergo R. I. for one and half years each under S. 14 I. P. C. whereas all other appellants have been convicted and sentenced to one year R. I. each under S. 147 I. P. C. All the sentences are to run concurrently. ( 2 ) ABRIDGED version of the posecution case is that the deceased of this case was Yadunath Chauhan. On 10-4-1984 he was going from his village Bankat to village Jagirsar for some work. When he was near the Government tube-well and the field ofbalchand, all the appellants surrounded him. Time was about 6. 30 a. m. Appellants Raja Ram and Ram Nath were having spear while all other had lathis. On exhortation of accused Ram Prasad, appellants Raja Ram and Ram Nath started assaulting Yadunath with spear and rest with the lathi. On the alarm raised by the victim, his son Babban Chauhan P. W. 1, Ram Lal, Roop Narain P. W. 3, Raghunath P. W. 2, Kamal Nath and others were attracted to the scene of occurrence. Seeing the pressure being mounted with the arrival of witnesses accused persons ran away with their respective weapons. ( 3 ) BABBAN Chauhan P. W. 1, son of the deceased, himself wrote down First Information Report Ex. Ka. 1 and carried the same along with victim Yadunath to P. S. Khejuri where F. I. R. was recorded and case was registered. A police constable was then directed to escrot injured to Government Hospital Kharsara. Finding the condition of Yadunath serious and alarming, the Medical officer of Kharsara Hospital referred Yadunath to District Hospital, Ballia. Accordingly Yadunath was removed to District Hospital, Ballia where he was declared dead. ( 4 ) AFTER registration of case at P. S. Khejuri, S. I. Narbadeshwar Shukla P. W. 9 took up investigation. He recorded the statement of Babban Chauhan but could not interrogate Yadunath as he was unable to speak on account of injuries. Accordingly Yadunath was removed to District Hospital, Ballia where he was declared dead. ( 4 ) AFTER registration of case at P. S. Khejuri, S. I. Narbadeshwar Shukla P. W. 9 took up investigation. He recorded the statement of Babban Chauhan but could not interrogate Yadunath as he was unable to speak on account of injuries. During the course of investigation, the investigating officer recorded statements of other witnesses, made inspection of scene of occurrence and prepared site plan Ex. Ka. 16. He also collected sample of plain and blood stained earth and also took in his possession blood stained stalks of wheat crop. The latter part of investigation was then completed by Station Officer Chingo Ram P. W. 8. He arrested two accused Ram Prasad and Subhash on 10-4-1984 and on their pointing out recovered blood stained spear and lathi and one more lathi which was not stained with blood. The blood stained articles were sent for chemical examination. The report of Serologist revealed that the earth, Ballam and clothes of the deceased had human blood. Lathi did not have any human blood. Blood of clothes of deceased was of a group of blood found in the earth and Ballam could not be ascertained on account of disintegration. ( 5 ) DR. A. Halim P. W. 5 conducted autopsy on the dead body of Yadunath Singh on 10-4-1984 at 2. 30 p. m. Deceased was aged about 40 years. He was of average built. Rigor mortis was present in lower limbs only and passed off from upper limbs. Following ante-mortem injuries were found :1. Lacerated wound 4 cm x 3-1/2 cm with constused swelling in an area of 8 cm x 6 cm, on middle of skull 12 cm above the root of right ear, bone deep. Clotted blood present under the scalp in the area of wound and bones under it found fractured. 2. Incised penetrating wound 4-1/2 cm x 1 cm x abdominal cavity deep in epigastrium just right to mid line, spindle shaped with clean cut margins and gaping in entrance appearing at both the ends, oblique. 3. Incised penetrating (punctured) wound 2-1/2 cm x 2 cm x abdominal cavity deep, just left of epigastrium, spindle shaped, 5 cm from injury No. 2, oblique. A piece of omentum coming out of wound. 4. 3. Incised penetrating (punctured) wound 2-1/2 cm x 2 cm x abdominal cavity deep, just left of epigastrium, spindle shaped, 5 cm from injury No. 2, oblique. A piece of omentum coming out of wound. 4. Incised wound 2 cm x 1 cm x 1/2 cm x muscle deep in right side eye brow, clean cut margins, parallel to eye brow. 5. Incised wound 3 cm x 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm muscle deep one left eye brow, middle part, clean cut margins, parallel to right eye brow. ( 6 ) INCISED wound 1-1/2 cm x 1/4 cm on right maxillary muscle, 1/2 cm deep, clean cut margins. ( 7 ) INCISED wound 1 cm x 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm muscle deep, on middle just right of chin, margin clean cut. ( 8 ) INCISED wound 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm x skin deep on left side chest 2 cm from injury No. 7 with clean cut margins. 6. The chest cavity contained 1/2 litre of fluid clotted blood. Abdominal cavity also contained 1/2 litre of fluid clotted blood. Diophramagm was also found cut at upper front part under injury No. 3. 7. Below injury No. 1 there was clotted blood and the bones of skull were fractured. There was also clotted blood under the membranes of brain. Stomach was empty so also small intestines. Large intestines contained faecal matter. Liver under injury No. 2 was cut. Spleen was pale and cut in upper part under injury No. 2. There was another injury in the spleen, 5 cm away from the above injury. This was corresponding to injuryno. 3. 8. Dr. Halim in his deposition before the Court further stated that cause of death of deceased was shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante-mortem injuries which were sufficient to cause death in oridinary course. Time of death was assessed at about 6. 30 in the morning of 10-4-1984. He further opined that all the injuries could be caused by sharp pointing weapon like bhala (spear ). In cross examination doctor further stated that there could be a difference of 2-3 hours in the time of death of the deceased. Ante-mortem injuries 1, 2 and 3 were fatal and were the cause of death of the deceased. He further opined that all the injuries could be caused by sharp pointing weapon like bhala (spear ). In cross examination doctor further stated that there could be a difference of 2-3 hours in the time of death of the deceased. Ante-mortem injuries 1, 2 and 3 were fatal and were the cause of death of the deceased. ( 9 ) IN the trial Court, prosecution produced nine witnesses in all, of whom Babban Chauhan P. W. 1, Raghunath P. W. 2 and Roop Narain P. W. 3 were witnesses of fact. ( 10 ) THE case of all the appellants was of denial and they stated that they have been falsely implicated due to enmity. They examined D. W. 1 Mohd. Murtaza in their defence. They also filed some documents to show that the complainant was inimical to them. ( 11 ) ON an analysis of evidence on record, the learned Session Judge recorded a finding that the incident occurred at the time and place as alleged by the prosecution; that the same was witnessed by P. W. 1, P. W. 2 and P. W. 3 and their evidence is trust-worthy. The learned Session Judge further found that the First Information Report was lodged with promptness and the theory set up by defence that Yadunath Chauhan had been done to death in early of the day while it was still dark was not correct. With these findings the learned Session Judge concluded that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing its case beyond reasonable doubt against all the appellants and accordingly convicted and sentenced the appellants as stated above. ( 12 ) WE have heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A. G. A. ( 13 ) IT was submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the First Information Report is a suspicious document and in any view of the matter it was ante-timed; that the alleged eye witnesses besides being partisan were chance witnesses; that their presence at the scene of occurrence is highly doubtful and the circumstances indicate that most likely deceased Yadunath was done to death in early hours of the day while it was still dark and none witnessed the occurrence and the appellants have been implicated falsely due to enmity or under suspicion. ( 14 ) THE factum of Yadunath dying a homicidal death has neither been disputed nor assailed before us. From the autopsy report and the statment of Dr. A. Halim P. W. 5 there could be no doubt that Yadunath had sustained a number of incised injuries including penetrating and punctured wounds which caused his death. ( 15 ) IT has now to be seen whether the prosecution has succeeded in establishing that murder of Yadunath was committed by appellant in the manner as alleged by the prosecution. Motive : ( 16 ) IN the first Information Report Ex. Ka. 2 the first information simply stated that the assailants were inimical to the deceased and his family members. The details of enmity were supplied by P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan son of the deceased Yadunath Chauhan in his deposition before the trial Court. He stated that prior to the present occurrence a litigation before the Consolidation authorities was pending between deceased Yadunath and Harilal father of accused appellant Chotey Lal. Another litigation was pending between deceased Yadunath and Raja Ram appellant. It is further stated by him that 107 Cr. P. C. proceedings were also pending between deceased and accused persons. In cross examination this witness stated that Yadunath had lost the case before the Consolidation Authority but against that verdict he had filed appeal. It is also admitted by him that in the proceedings under S. 107 Cr. P. C. witnesses Kamal Nath and Rup Narain were also parties along with deceased Yadunath. From accused side a number of documents were filed which also show that some litigations were pending between them and the deceased. The motive was thus evenly balanced. It cuts both ways. If on one hand accused persons had a motive to commit the murder of deceased Yadunath, the first informant had an equal motive to nominate the appellants falsely on account of enmity or suspicion. In such a situation, the evidence of the eye witnesses is to be examined with care and caution and if the same is found trust-worthy and believable thequestion of motive would be only academic. ( 17 ) WE now come to the oral evidence of the three witnesses who were produced from prosecution side before the trial Court as eye witnesses. ( 17 ) WE now come to the oral evidence of the three witnesses who were produced from prosecution side before the trial Court as eye witnesses. They were P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan, P. W. 2 Raghunath and P. W. 3 Roop Narain, P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan stated that on 10-4-1984 at about 6. 30 a. m. his father Yadunath Chauhan was going to village Jigirsar and at the same time he himself was going to Bikau for getting his hairs cut. When he heard cries of his father coming from the side of fields of Balchand, he rushed towards that side and saw that the accused Raja Ram, Ram Nath, Ram Prasad, Subhash, Devendra and Chotey Lal had surrounded his father. Raja Ram and Ram Nath had spears while other accused persons were having lathi. Ram Prasad uttered "it was a good opportunity and Yadunath be killed. " Whereupon accused Raja Ram and Ram Nath started assaulting his father with spears while Ram Prasad, Chotey Lal, Devendra and Subhash gave lathi blows. Besides him, Ram Lal, Roop Narain P. W. 3, Raghunath P. W. 2 and Kamal Nath had also arrived there and witnessed the incident. He further deposed that one lathi blow of Ram Prasad accused struck on the head of his father whereby he fell down on the ground. The accused persons then ran away towards south. Thereafter he got a cot arranged from his house and a piece of paper. While Raghunath and others were engaged in making arrangement for carrying the victim Yadunath, he himself started writing report. After scribing the same he along with witness carried his father to police station Khejuri and lodged the report there at 7. 45 a. m. His father was then carried to Kharsara Government Hospital under police escort. The doctor present there asked them to take Yadunath to District Hospital, Ballia. They waited sometime for the bus. He was interrogated by the investigating officer at the Bus stand and from there he went to Ballia District Hospital where his father Yadunath was declared dead. ( 18 ) P. W. 2 Raghunath stated that at the time of incident he was present at the thresher of Mangu where he heard cries coming from the side of fields of Balchand. Thresher of Mangu was situated at a distance of 50-60 paces from Balchands filed. ( 18 ) P. W. 2 Raghunath stated that at the time of incident he was present at the thresher of Mangu where he heard cries coming from the side of fields of Balchand. Thresher of Mangu was situated at a distance of 50-60 paces from Balchands filed. On hearing cries he rushed towards the field of Balchand and witnessed the incident. He also specifically stated that Ram Prasad exhorted to kill Yadunath whereupon Raja Ram and Ram Nath Assaulted Yadunath with spears which they were holding. Ram Prasad gave a lathi blow on the head of Yadunath while other accused who were holding lathi gave threats to the witnesses not to come forward by brandishing their lathi towards them. He further stated that after the accused persons fled away, Babban Chauhan arranged for a cot and wrote down report and thereafter the victim Yadunath was carried to police station along with First Information Report and from there he was taken to Kharsara Hospital and then to Ballia Hospital where Yadunath was declared dead. ( 19 ) P. W. 3 Roop Narain deposed that at the time of occurrence he was going to his field from his home and when he was about 20-25 paces in the north of his house, he heard cries coming from the side of field of Balchand. He ran towards that field and saw entire incident. He also stated that Raja Ram and Ram Nath assaulted Yadunath with spear while other accused were holding lathi, surrounded him and gave threats to witnesses and only Ram Prasad struck a lathi blow on the head of Yadunath. ( 20 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellants made a criticism in the testimony of the aforesaid witnesses by contending that P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan is admittedly son of the deceased while P. W. 3 Roop Narain belonged to the party of deceased as has been admitted by P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan. It was further submitted that all the three witnesses examined from prosecution side had no field of their own near about the place of occurrence. It was contended that all these witnesses were interested and chance witnesses. It was further submitted that all the three witnesses examined from prosecution side had no field of their own near about the place of occurrence. It was contended that all these witnesses were interested and chance witnesses. It is well settled principle of appreciation of evidence that their evidence cannot be discarded on that ground alone and if after careful and close examination their evidence is found trustworthy and reliable, conviction can still be based and prosecution case will not fail merely for the reason that persons of neighbouring field were not produced. The real test is to find out whether they were present at the scene of occurrence and have given a truthful version of the incident. ( 21 ) WE have examined and screened the evidence of these witnesses carefully and find no good reason to discard the same. They have given plausible and acceptablereasons of their presence near about the place of occurrence. P. W. 2 Raghunath is absolutely an independent witness. He had no axe to grind against any of the appellants and he would be the last person to implicate accused persons falsely. According to him he heard the cries of the deceased when he was proceeding to his field from his house. It could not be suggested to him that he had no field in that direction,where field of Balchand was situated. All the three witnesses have given a vivid account of the occurrence and they have been consistent as regards the detatils of assault made upon the deceased. Their evidence substantially tallies with the medical evidence. Dr. A. Halim P. W. 5 who conducted autopsy has specifically expressed the opinion that excepting injury No. 1 all other injuries could be caused with spear having sharp edges. The presence of P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan is also rendered established not only from the evidence of eye witness P. W. 2 Raghunath but also for the reason that the First Information Report was promptly lodged and victim Yadunath was carried alive by him first to police station and then to Kharsara Hospital. When Yadunath was brought to police station, case was registered at 7. 45 a. m. on the basis of written report of Babban Chauhan. The injuries of Yadunath were noted down in the general diary registering the case. When Yadunath was brought to police station, case was registered at 7. 45 a. m. on the basis of written report of Babban Chauhan. The injuries of Yadunath were noted down in the general diary registering the case. It will not be out of place to mention here that when Yadunath, on the advise of medical officer of Kharsara Dispensary, was brought to Ballia District Hospital and declared dead, information to that effect was sent from District Hospital to police station Kotwali, Ballia through the Ward boy of the Hospital. This informatoion was registered in the general diary of P. W. Kotwali at 10. 20 a. m. and immediately through the same G. D. S. I. Tarak Nath Singh was sent to District Hospital, where he held inquest. It is thus fully established that Yadunath the victim was carried alive from the place of occurrence to police station and from there to Kharsara Hospital and lastly to Ballia District Hospital where he was declared dead. P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan had accompanied the victim to all these places along with P. W. 2 Raghunath. P. W. 2 Raghunath, who is wholly independent, has also testified that F. I. R. was scribed by P. W. 1 at the spot and was carried along with the victim Yadunath to police station where the same was lodged in the morning. We have no reason to disbelive Raghunath who fully corroborated the statement of P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan. We could also find no tangible material on record from which it could be doubted that the F. I. R. was not recorded at 7. 45 a. m. in the same morning. In the circumstances, we find that the F. I. R. was lodged with all promptness ruling out the possibility of maneuvering or consultation and it has a great corroborative value. ( 22 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellants pointed out that P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan was a young boy of about 17 years of age and according to him he scribed the report on the spot immediately after the occurrence. It was submitted by him that having seen the murder of his father with his own eyes he would not have been in a position to write the report within a few minutes of the occurrance particularly when other relations had also arrived. It was submitted by him that having seen the murder of his father with his own eyes he would not have been in a position to write the report within a few minutes of the occurrance particularly when other relations had also arrived. It was argued that this unnatural conduct of the witness will lead to an inference that incident had occurred much earlier and he had not witnessed the same and after coming to know that his father was lying seriously injured he went there and then prepared the report much later. We have duly considered this submission of the learned counsel but find no weight therein. First Information Report of the present case was not a lengthy document. Therein, the first informant simply narrated the facts relating to the incident, the names of assailants, weapons used in the assault and names of witnesses. Regarding enmity only this much was mentioned that the parties were on inimical terms. Had the F. I. R. been written at the police station or at any later stage it would have been a lengthy document. Assuming that the first informant was in a state of shock and grief on account of having witnessed the murderous assault made on his father yet it could not be said that he could not have been in a positive frame of mind to write the report. Human character and behaviour are unmeasureable as they vary from individual to individual depending upon own courage, mental equipment, social awarness etc. Therefore, the mere fact that Babban Chauhan could gather courage and control his emotions within a few minutes after seeing the occurrence and could write the report himself, will not make this witness unnatural as this conduct of his by no means could be regarded as incongruous with his eye witness account. ( 23 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellants also tried to persuade us to doubt the presence of these witnesses on the ground that their conduct in not going to the rescuse of the deceased when he was in the clutches of the assailants was not unnatural particularly when P. W. 1 was deceaseds son and P. W. 3 belonged to the group of deceased. We hasten to say that this comment made by the learned counsel is most unreal. We hasten to say that this comment made by the learned counsel is most unreal. We may at once point out that none of these witnesses were asked as to why they did not intervene or made any effort to resuce the deceased. In any view of the matter it is of common experience that every person reacts in his own way. There are person who on seeing a murderous assault are so much stupefied that they become speechless and stand rooted to the spot. Some become hysteric and emotional and start wailing. Some start shouting for external help. Others run away to keep themselves away from reach of the assailants, yet there are persons who are so brave that they jump into the fray to the rescue of the victim without even least caring for themselves and go even to the extent of counter-attacking the assailants. Everyone reacts in his own way and no rule of nautral reaction can be set. Therefore it will be wholly unrealistic to doubt presence of these witnesses simply on the ground that they did not make any effort to rescue the victim or that they made no attempt to apprehend the assailants. ( 24 ) ANOTHER criticism made in the testimony of Babban Chauhan is that before the trial Court the witness stated that at the time of the occurrence he was going to the house of Bikau barber for getting his hairs cut but no such reason was given by him in the First Information Report or in the statement given to the Investigating Officer. It is well settled that First Information Report is not an encyclopedia. In the report which was a short one the witness had clearly mention that he was attracted to the scene of occurrence on hearing cries of his father Yadunath coming from the side of field of Balchand. It is also in evidence that statement of this witness under S. 161 Cr. P. C. was recorded by the Investigating Officer when the witness was waiting for the Bus at Kharsara for carrying his injured father to Ballia Hospital. We cannot loose sight of the anxiety which this witness must be having at that particular moment. It is also in evidence that statement of this witness under S. 161 Cr. P. C. was recorded by the Investigating Officer when the witness was waiting for the Bus at Kharsara for carrying his injured father to Ballia Hospital. We cannot loose sight of the anxiety which this witness must be having at that particular moment. It is crystal clear from his evidence that the condition of his father was grave and serious because the doctor of Kharsara Hospital had thought it necessary to refer Yadunath to District Hospital and no treatment was given there. In these circumstances Babban Chauhan must be worried and must be anxiously waiting for the arrival of the Bus so that his father could be removed to District Hopital, Ballia at the earliest. In such a situation, if this witness did not desclosed to the Investigating Officer that at the time of occurrence he was going to Bikau barber for getting his hairs cut, this omission would not be enough to make his presence doubtful particularly when his evidence has been fully supported and corroborated by independent witness Raghunath P. W. 2 and the attending circumstances appearing in the case. ( 25 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellants submitted that during post mortem examination stomach and small intestines of the deceased were found empty whereas in the large intestines faecal matter was present. It was argued that according to the prosecution case deceased was going to village Jigirsar for some necessary work. Therefore, in the natural course it was expected that he would have evacuated himself and eaten something before leaving for Jigirsar village. According to learned counsel absence of any food in stomach or in the small intestines and presence of faecal matter in large intestines raises a doubt in the prosecution allegation that the incident occurred at about 6. 30 a. m. This submission of the learned counsel for the appellants is also not capable of being accepted in the wake of inimpeching evidence of the prosecution witnesses. Deceased had left his house early in the morning and he was going to village Jigirsar. It could be that he might have decided to have break-fast or some food at the place of his destination. The doctor who conducted post morten examination has simply mentioned that in the large intestines facecal matter was present. Deceased had left his house early in the morning and he was going to village Jigirsar. It could be that he might have decided to have break-fast or some food at the place of his destination. The doctor who conducted post morten examination has simply mentioned that in the large intestines facecal matter was present. It was not reported that the large intestines were full of faecal matter. Therefore, even if the deceased had evacuated himself before leaving for village Jigirsar some facecal matter could still be left in the large intestines. Even otherwise also it is well settled that the state and condition of stomach and intestines are not conclusive to determine time of death of deceased. This may be a factor which might have to be considered along with other evidence but this fact alone cannot bedecisive. ( 26 ) IN defence accused persons examined Mohd. Murtaza as D. W. 1 who was Lekhpal (Consolidation ). His evidence was of no use as far as incident is concerned and it does not have any adverse effect on the prosecution case. ( 27 ) ON a close examination of the prosecution evidence and the circumstances appearing in the case, we concur with the trial Court that it has been fully established that the incident occurred at the time and place as alleged by the prosecution. ( 28 ) SO far as appellant, Raja Ram, Ram Nath and Ram Prasad are concerned, their participation in the incident in question is proved beyond doubt. Raja Ram and Ram Nath are said to be armed with spear and according to the prosecution witnesses both of them had assaulted Yadunath Chauhan. In the post mortem examination two incised penetrating wounds were found besides five other incised injuries. Dr. A. Halim specifically opined that all these injuries could be caused by spear. With regard to Ram Prasad appellant it has been specifically stated by all the three witnesses of fact that this appellant struck a lathi blow on the head of deceased. Dr. A. Halim P. W. 5 found only one lacerated wound on the skull of deceased. This has been described as ante mortem injury No. 1 It was a lacerated wound 4 cm x 31/2 cm with contused swelling in an area of 8 cm x 6 cm x skull bones. Dr. A. Halim P. W. 5 found only one lacerated wound on the skull of deceased. This has been described as ante mortem injury No. 1 It was a lacerated wound 4 cm x 31/2 cm with contused swelling in an area of 8 cm x 6 cm x skull bones. Under this injury bones were found fractured and clotted blood was also found under the membranes of brain. Dr. A. Halim has further deposed that ante mortem injuries No. 1, 2, and 3 were all fatal. Therefore, Ram Prasad is also equally liable for the death of the deceased like appellants Raja Ram and Ram Nath. ( 29 ) AS regards appellant Devendra, Chotey Lal and Subhash, we find that the prosecution case against them is not free from doubt. They were alleged to be armed with lathi. In the First Information Report there was a clear averment that these appellants also assaulted the deceased with lathi. P. W. 1 Babban Chauhan in his examination-in-chief also stated that all the assailants having lathi were continuously hurling them on the deceased P. W. 2 and P. W. 3 however, in their deposition made an improvement and developed in case that only Ram Prasad, appellant strick a lathi blow on the head of the deceased while all others having lathi did not make any assault on the deceased but they simply waved their lathi to thwart away the witnesses. It appears that since deceased had only one blunt object injury which is specifically attributed to Ram Prasad alone, the prosecutor did not desitate to develop the case through the evidence of P. W. 2 and P. W. 3 that these appellants did not strike any blow of lathi on the deceased but they simply thereatened the witnesses by brandishing lathi towards them. No such case was put forward in the first information report or at the investigating stage. We, therefore, as an abundant caution, extend benefit of doubt to appellants Devendra, Chotey Lal and Subhash and acquit them of the offences charged for. No such case was put forward in the first information report or at the investigating stage. We, therefore, as an abundant caution, extend benefit of doubt to appellants Devendra, Chotey Lal and Subhash and acquit them of the offences charged for. ( 30 ) FOR the reasons stated above, we hold Raja Ram, Ram Prasad and Ram Nath appellants guilty of the offence of murder of Yadunath and convict them under S. 302 read with S. 34 I. P. C. instead of S. 302 read with S. 149 I. P. C. However their sentence of imprisonment for life is maintained. The conviction and sentence under S. 147 and 148 I. P. C. are set aside they are acquitted of the same. ( 31 ) CONVICTION and sentence of appellants Devendra, Chotey Lal and Subhash as recorded by the trial Court are set aside. They are acquitted of the offences charged for. ( 32 ) APPEAL is allowed in part. Appellants Raja Ram, Ram Nath and Ram Prasad are convicted under S. 302 read with S. 34 I. P. C. and each of them is sentenced to imprisonment for life. They are on bail. They shall surrender to their bail bonds forthwith before the trial Court. In case they fail to do so, the trial Court will take prompt steps to put these appellants back in jail to undergo the sentence imposed upon them. On their surrender or arrest as the case may be, their bail bonds shall stand cancelled. ( 33 ) APPEAL of appellants Devendra, Chotey Lal and Subhash is allowed. Their conviction and sentences as recorded by the trial Court are set aside. They are acquitted of the offences charged for. They are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds are cancelled and sureties discharged. Order accordingly. . .