JUDGMENT A.S. Garg, J. - In a criminal trial when two groups of people clash inter se with weapons and cause injuries to the members of the each group, before any responsibility for crime is settled, it must be decided as to who is the aggressor. It is also to be seen as to whether the prosecution has set up a believable and correct version of the occurrence and if not the Courts of law have to vouch-safe that there is no miscarriage of justice. 2. In the given case the occurrence allegedly took place on 25.10.1992 around 9.00 P.M. in village Aungad, within the area of Police Station Nissing, district Karnal. When Mahinder PW.13 was passing through the street in front of the shop of Madan Lal, all the appellants, namely, Jai Singh, Ramesh Chand, Naresh, Mohan Lal, Pala Ram, Sat Pal, Madan Lal, Ram Parkash, Rajesh, Ram Bhaj and Jai Kumar fully armed were standing there with Gandasis and lathis in front of the shop of the Sat Pal. Sat Pal appellant-accused raised a lalkara to teach him a lesson for making less payment of the crackers and inflicted a Gandasi blow on the right leg of Mahinder and when Mahinder was being rescued by Ishwar, he too was given Gandasi blows from the reverse side by Pala Singh appellant causing injuries on his face jaw and chin; Madan Lal inflicted two lathi blows on his face: Jai Kumar gave four lathi blows to Ishwar out of which two fell on his hand and two on his chest; on hearing alarm Shambhu deceased came to the spot when Ram Bhaj inflicted a lathi blow on his head; Ramesh gave a lathi blow on the knee of left leg of Shambhu. In the meantime Murti Devi wife of Ishwar Singh and Mahinder came to the spot and Jai Singh appellant gave a lathi blow to her on her head; Naresh gave a lathi blow on her back; Jai Singh and Naresh also gave lathi blows on the legs of said Mahinder. Ganpat PW.12 came to the scene of occurrence and he was given a Gandasi blow on his right arm by Mohan Lal appellant as the latter had tried to rescue the injured. Still Ram Parkash and Rajesh appellants inflicted Gandasi blows on the shoulder and on the back of the palm of right hand of Ganpat. Ganpat PW.12 came to the scene of occurrence and he was given a Gandasi blow on his right arm by Mohan Lal appellant as the latter had tried to rescue the injured. Still Ram Parkash and Rajesh appellants inflicted Gandasi blows on the shoulder and on the back of the palm of right hand of Ganpat. Siri Pal son of Ganpat and Satta raised alarm to dissuade the appellants from committing further assaults. The assailants fled away along with their weapons. The injured were removed to the hospital. 3. As a result of this occurrence 11 appellants were held for being responsible for the death of Shambhu and for causing injuries to Mohinder, Iswar, Murti Devi and Ganpat. Shambhu had passed away on 9.11.1992 at 9.00 P.M. as per intimation Ex.PD. 4. On receipt of ruqa Ex.PH regarding the admission of injured in Civil Health Centre, Nissing, ASI Ram Karan PW.14 went there and he came to know that the injured have been referred to Civil Hospital, Karnal. Thereafter he went to Civil Hospital, Karnal and moved an application Ex.PJ/1 with regard to the fitness of the injured to make a statement. Shambhu Ram was declared unfit whereas Ganpat and Ishwar were declared fit to make their statements. He thereafter recorded the statement Ex.PV of Ganpat PW.12 in the said Hospital on 26.10.1992 at 1.15 P.M. and sent the same to the Police Station for registration of a case and on its basis formal F.I.R. Ex.PO was recorded at 2.30 P.M. The clothes of the injured were taken into possession vide memo Ex.PW. Thereafter he went to the scene of occurrence and prepared rough site plan Ex.PY and lifted blood-stained earth which was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PX. Later on the accused were arrested and recoveries of weapons of offence was effected. After the death of the Shambhu Ram, the offence was converted to that under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. SI Surinder Kumar PW.8 on receipt of the information about the death of the Shambhu Ram went to Civil Hospital, Karnal and prepared inquest report Ex.PK/1 and sent the dead body for post mortem. 5. Dr. Sunil Kumar Midha PW.4 conducted autopsy on the dead body of Shambhu deceased on 10.11.1992 and found the following injuries :- (1) There was sutured wound 4 cm long on right parietal region of skull. 5. Dr. Sunil Kumar Midha PW.4 conducted autopsy on the dead body of Shambhu deceased on 10.11.1992 and found the following injuries :- (1) There was sutured wound 4 cm long on right parietal region of skull. Wound was clean and edges were healed. (2) Black eye on the right side was present. There was no swelling around it. 6. In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death was head injury as described above which was sufficient to cause death in the course of events. Ex.PK is the copy of the post mortem report. 7. At the trial the appellants took up the plea that they were innocent and there was a danger to the life of the accused-party and the complainant party was the aggressor. There was dispute regarding the payment of price of crackers. A Panchayat was convened and the amount of the price of crackers was fixed by the Panchayat and still Mahinder was demanding the price and he himself used the force and was going to cause harm to the accused party. It was a Diwali festival on the day of occurrence. Mann Singh DW.1 and Om Parkash DW.2 supported the case of the defence. DSP Rishal Singh DW.3 found Ram Parkash, Rajesh, Ram Bhaj, Jai Singh, Ramesh Chand, Naresh and Mohan Lal to be innocent and their names were kept in column No. II in the challan. 8. However, at the trial the aforesaid seven persons were also summoned. After evidence was recorded, the learned trial Judge with the applicability of Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code convicted Pala Ram, Sat Pal, Madan Lal, Ram Parkash, Rajesh, Ram Bhaj and Jai Kumar appellants under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each. In default of payment of fine each of them was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. They were further convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. They were also convicted under Section 325 read with Section 149 of the Indian penal Code and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each. They were also convicted under Section 325 read with Section 149 of the Indian penal Code and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each. In default of payment of fine each of them was ordered to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. All of them were further convicted under Section 324 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months each. Still further they were convicted under Section 323 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months. Mohan Lal appellant was convicted under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Naresh and Ramesh Chand and Jai Singh appellants were convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months. The substantive sentences of imprisonment were ordered to run concurrently. 9. So now during the course of the arguments we have been taken through the statements of Ganpat PW.12 and Mohinder PW.13. They have claimed that the appellants had inflicted injuries on the complainant side. They have blamed the appellant-accused for being the aggressors and having caused the death of the Shambhu and for inflicting injuries to others. 10. It remains a fact that 20 injuries in all are there on the complainant side inclusive of the injuries of the deceased while there are 11 injuries on the person of the appellant-accused. Dr. Sanjeev Grover PW.3 medico-legally examined Ishwar Singh on 25.10.1992 and found the following injuries on his person :- (1) A laceration 4 cm x 1 cm bone deep over the lower jaw left side. X-ray was advised with surgical opinion. (2) Bleeding was present from the mouth, patient was unable to open the mouth and speak. Advised Dental Surgeons opinion. (3) 1 cm x .5 cm laceration over the face right side 2 cm below the right eye. Advised X ray. (4) Reddish abrasion over the outer side of right eye brow. (5) Diffused swelling over the left forearm, dorsal aspect 6 cm above the wrist. Advised x-ray. (6) 2.5 x 2 swelling over the middle of dorsum of right hand, bluish in colour. (7) Multiple small reddish abrasion over the right clavicle region. Advised X ray. (4) Reddish abrasion over the outer side of right eye brow. (5) Diffused swelling over the left forearm, dorsal aspect 6 cm above the wrist. Advised x-ray. (6) 2.5 x 2 swelling over the middle of dorsum of right hand, bluish in colour. (7) Multiple small reddish abrasion over the right clavicle region. Injury No. 1 was grievous and the remaining injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt weapon. Ex.PA/1 is the copy of the medico-legal report. On 26.10.1992, at 2.30 A.M. the doctor medico-legally examined Ganpat PW.12 and found the following injuries on his person :- (1) Incised wound 2.5 cm x 1 cm over the back of right arm about 3 cm above the right elbow. Bleeding was present. (2) Reddish blue contusion 2 cm x 1.5 cm over the back of left shoulder and advised x-ray. (3) Red abrasion 3 cm x 1.5 cm over the dorsum of right hand. Injury No. 2 was grievous and others were simple in nature. Injury No. 1 was caused by sharp edged weapon and others with blunt weapon. Ex.PB/1 is the copy of the medico-legal report. On the same day at 12.40 P.M. the aforesaid doctor medico-legally examined Mahinder Singh PW.13 and found the following injuries on his person :- (1) Laceration 3 cm x 1 cm over the right leg medial side 7 cm above the ankle. Clotted blood was present. (2) Two contusions reddish blue in colour over the right leg, calf region upper half 5 cm x 3 cm and 7 cm x 3 cm transversely placed and separated by 5 cm from each other. (3) Contusion reddish blue 6 cm x 5 cm over the left calf (upper half). (4) Diffused swelling 5 cm x 4 cm reddish blue over the right elbow. (5) Reddish blue contusion 5 x 4 cm over dorsum of right wrist. (6) Dark red abrasion over the back 2 in number 15 cm x 2 cm and 10 x 2 cm respectively over the first on the middle obliquely placed and second was just above the right hip vertically placed. All the injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt weapon. Ex.PF is the copy of the medico-legal report. (6) Dark red abrasion over the back 2 in number 15 cm x 2 cm and 10 x 2 cm respectively over the first on the middle obliquely placed and second was just above the right hip vertically placed. All the injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt weapon. Ex.PF is the copy of the medico-legal report. On the same day at 12.50 P.M. the aforesaid doctor medico-legally examined Murti Devi and found the following injuries on her person :- (1) 2 cm x .5 cm laceration on right frontal region 2 cm from the mid line. Clotted blood was present. (2) Complaint of pain in the right arm on its front but there was no mark of external injury. 11. All the injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt weapon. Ex.PG is the copy of the medico-legal report. 12. The aforesaid doctor also medico-legally examined the accused party. On 25.10.1992 at 11.15 P.M. He medico-legally examined Sat Pal appellant and found the following injuries on his person :- (1) Incised wound 10 cm x 1 cm over the scalp left parietal region 3 cm from mid line. Bone was visible. Bleeding was present. Advised X-ray. (2) Incised wound over the back and upper side of right ear at its attachment with the skull, skin deep, bleeding was present. (3) Reddish blue contusion over the right hand dorsum side on the medial half. Advised X-ray. (4) Reddish blue contusion over the left forearm dorsum size about 5 cm above the wrist. Advised X-ray. (5) Laceration 1 cm x .5 cm over the right leg on the front about 4 cm above the ankle. Advised X-ray. 13. Injury Nos. 3 and 4 were grievous whereas the others were simple in nature. Injury Nos. 1 and 2 were caused by sharp edged weapon and remaining with blunt weapon. According to the (doctor) injuries No. 1 and 3 could be caused by Gandasi. Ex.DA is the copy of the medico-legal report. 14. On the same day at 11.30 P.M. the doctor medico-legally examined Madan Lal appellant and found the following injuries on his person :- (1) Laceration 5 cm x 1 cm over the scalp left side frontal region. Advised x-ray. (2) Abrasion bright red in colour over dorsum of right index finger 2 cm x 1 cm. There was diffused swelling (at) base of finger. Advised X-ray. Advised x-ray. (2) Abrasion bright red in colour over dorsum of right index finger 2 cm x 1 cm. There was diffused swelling (at) base of finger. Advised X-ray. Both the injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt weapon as per copy of medico-legal report Ex.DB. Similarly, on the same day at 11.35 P.M. the aforesaid doctor medico- legally examined Jai Kumar appellant and found the following injuries on his person :- (1) Laceration 4 x 1 cm over the head in the middle antero- posteriorly placed in the mid line, scalp deep. Bleeding was present. X-ray was advised. (2) Abrasion bright red 2.5 cm x 1.5 cm over the face just below the outer side of left eye. (3) 2 cm x 1 cm reddish abrasion over the right elbow. 15. All the injuries were simple in nature caused by blunt weapon. Ex.DC is the copy of the medico-legal report. 16. On 26.10.1992, at 8.00 A.M. Kitabo was medico-legally examined by the aforesaid doctor and he found the following injury on her person :- (1) Laceration 2.5 cm x .5 cm over the right parietal region just adjacent to mid line. Clotted blood was present. 17. The injury was simple and caused by blunt weapon. Ex.DD is the copy of the medico-legal report. 18. The learned counsel for the appellants has taken us through the oral testimony of Ganpat PW.12 who was confronted with his statement made before the police wherein he admittedly had not mentioned the names of aforesaid seven persons to have participated in the commission of the crime. He claimed that he had omitted these names because of nervousness. 19. The learned counsel also has taken us through the statement of Mahinder PW.13 wherein he claimed that Ganpat PW.12 reached the spot when he and Ishwar Singh had already received the injuries. This makes presence of Ganpat PW.12 at the spot to be doubtful. Mahinder has denied the suggestion that he was under the influence of liquor on the day of occurrence and he refused to get himself medico-legally examined. This witness is falsified by the version of the Medical Officer. A part of the statement of Dr. Sanjeev Grover PW. This makes presence of Ganpat PW.12 at the spot to be doubtful. Mahinder has denied the suggestion that he was under the influence of liquor on the day of occurrence and he refused to get himself medico-legally examined. This witness is falsified by the version of the Medical Officer. A part of the statement of Dr. Sanjeev Grover PW. 3, who had examined Mahinder Singh son of Shambhu, is reproduced hereunder :- "The injured (Mahinder Singh) had first of all come at 11.45 P.M. on 25.10.92 and he refused to get himself examined medico-legally and intimation to this effect was sent to P.S. Nissing at 12.10. A.M. on 26.10.92 and the patient again offered for medico-legal examination and it was thereafter that I conducted the examination. The patient was under the effect of alcohol at the time of first arrival." 20. The plea of the defence is contained in the statement of Sat Pal recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which may be reproduced as under :- "The facts of this case are that on the day of occurrence Mohinder PW came at the house of Jai Kumar in drunken condition and started abusing him. I and Madan were also present there being his nephew and also on account of Diwali festival. Jai Kumar and his wife stopped them from abusing and thereafter Mohinder PW went back and after sometime he came along with Shambhu deceased, Ganpat and Ishwar Singh. Mohinder PW gave a gandasi blow on my head and I fell down on the ground. Thereafter Jai Kumar and his wife Kitabo Devi came forward to save me and then all of them started causing injuries to them as well as to Madan Lal and me. Jai Kumar etc. also caused injuries to the complainant in their self defence. Initially I, Pala Ram, Madan Lal and Jai Kumar were challaned and remaining accused were found to be innocent because all the eye witnesses including the complainant Ganpat and injured witnesses related to deceased, had stated in their statement under section 161 Criminal Procedure Code that only four persons i.e. myself, Pala Ram, Madan and Jai Kumar were responsible for the death of Shambu and remaining accused were not named by them at all. The matter was placed before Panchayat also in which the complainant party had admitted that seven persons have been wrongly named. The matter was placed before Panchayat also in which the complainant party had admitted that seven persons have been wrongly named. In fact the complainant party was aggressor and they entered the house of Jai Kumar and caused injuries to me, Madan, Jai Kumar and Kitabo Devi." 21. So in the aforesaid circumstances, the complainant side had come and has caused serious injuries on the head of Sat Pal appellant whose life would have been in danger. The aforesaid injuries on the persons of the appellants as mentioned above could neither be self-suffered nor could be inflicted by brick bats. Thus the appellants were well within their rights to cause injuries on the person of Shambhu. The deceased only received one Lathi blow on his head which ultimately resulted into his death after 18 days of the occurrence. So, the learned defence counsel is justified in his argument that the true genesis of the occurrence has been materially and motivatedly concealed. It is the consistent and admitted case of the prosecution that the injured accused were the first to arrive in the hospital and their version should have been taken by the Investigating Officer. So in the such overwhelming circumstances, the version of the appellants appears to be correct and the complainant party was the aggressor and in the given circumstances the conviction of the appellants cannot be sustained as it would result into miscarriage of justice. 12. In view of the above discussion both Crl.A. No. 647-DB of 2000 and Crl.A. No. 657-DB of 2000 are allowed and the appellants are acquitted of the charges framed against them. Crl.R.No. 475 of 2001 is dismissed. Appeals allowed.