Judgment : S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA, J. ( 1 ) THE five appellants have preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction dated 6-12-1991 passed by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Gumla in Sessions Trial No. 59/91 having found guilty u/s 302/34 of the I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment. The appellant Charku Kharia had also been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months for charges u/s 323 of the I. P. C. ( 2 ) THE case of prosecution in short as explained by informant, Etwa Kharia that on 3-10-1990, he was sitting in his house in village Dirgaon along with his father, Mangra Kharia (deceased) and uncles (brother of deceased) Sullu Kharia (P. W. 5) and Rejwa Kharia (P. W. 7 ). In the meantime, Karmu Kharia (P. W. 6) of his village who is adhbatai of informant and had cultivated some land came and told them to take their share of the produce which was ready after thrashing and as there was a chance to rain. The informant initially refused to go at that time but Karmu Kharia informed that if they do not go others may take away their shares. In such a situation the informant along with his father, Mangra Kharia (deceased) and the uncle, Bullu Kharia and Rajwa Kharia proceeded for Khalihan. When they reached the Khalihan, the accused, Charku Kharia (A-1), Hirsai Kharia (A-2), Sanichar Kharia (A-3), Malha Kharia (A-4) and Atwa Jema Kharia (A-5) came running with arms. Charku Kharia was armed with a daw and remaining accused were armed with kulharas (axe ). Charku Kharia gave a daw blow on the head of his father (Mangra Kharia) whereinafter he fell down near Devi Mandap. Having seen such situation, the informant and others (uncles) started to flee away but all the accused persons also chased them. His uncle, Rajwa Kharia (P. W. 7) was also assaulted by Charku Kharia from the blunt edge of daw on his back and the accused persons thereafter ran away. The informant and his uncle when came near Devi Mandap, saw Mangra Kharia bleeding profusely and was dead. The occurrence was stated to have also been seen by Dukhia Kharia, Panchu Mahto, Khudi Saw (P. W. 8) Sarpanch and others. The informant and his uncle when came near Devi Mandap, saw Mangra Kharia bleeding profusely and was dead. The occurrence was stated to have also been seen by Dukhia Kharia, Panchu Mahto, Khudi Saw (P. W. 8) Sarpanch and others. The motive for committing the murder of deceased is said to be the litigation between the accused and informants father (deceased) in respect to land which belonged to an old lady, who gifted it to the informants grand-father as he served the old lady in her old age. The accused persons (appellants herein) alleged to have wanted to grab the land which was the reason of litigation and the cause of death of the informants father. The informant and one of his uncles went to the police station and lodged F. I. R. It was written by A. S. I. read over to informant whereinafter the informant put his signature. The case was registered u/s. 302 of the I. P. C. and on submission of charge-sheet, the case was committed to the Court of session and trial. ( 3 ) THE prosecution produced altogether nine witnesses. Out of them, Parsu Ram Singh (P. W. 1), Advocates Clerk is normal witness. Dr. Hemant Kumar (P. W. 2) did post-mortem on the body on 6-10-1990 and submitted report, Rajwa (sic) Bodra (P. W. 7) was the Officer-in-Charge, who investigated the case and the witnesses Karmu Kharia (P. W. 6) and Budhman Kharia (P. W. 9) were tendered. The remaining witnesses, Etwa Kharia (P. W. 4) - informant, Balu Kharia (P. W. 5) Rajwa Kharia (P. W. 7) are eye-witnesses. They are also related to the deceased. The other witness, Khudi Sao (P. W. 8) - Sarpanch is an independent eye witness. On the basis of their statement and other evidence, the Sessions Court convicted the appellants. ( 4 ) THE counsel for the appellants submitted that there are certain discrepancies and contradiction in the evidence of the witnesses. Certain facts were also not explained by prosecution. The dead body of the deceased was taken by police after about two days. The inquest report Ext 3 (sic) though prepared after about 48 hours, it was shown that the blood was coming out of injury which is not possible. There was only one fatal injury. Certain facts were also not explained by prosecution. The dead body of the deceased was taken by police after about two days. The inquest report Ext 3 (sic) though prepared after about 48 hours, it was shown that the blood was coming out of injury which is not possible. There was only one fatal injury. ( 5 ) TO determine the issue as to whether the prosecution was able to prove the charges against the accused (appellants) beyond all reasonable doubt or not, it is necessary to take into consideration the evidence of one or other witnesses as made before the Court below. ( 6 ) THE informant, Etwa Kharia (P. W. 4) in his evidence has corroborated the statement as was made in the F. I. R. (Ext. 1 ). He stated that on the day of occurrence at about 4. P. M. , he was in his house along with his father and uncles. In the meantime, Karma Kheria who was the adhbatai and cultivated their land, came and asked them to take their share of produce which was ready after thrashing and there was a chance to rain. Karmu Kharia also told that if they do not take their share of produce, some others may have their share. Thereafter informant along with his father, Mangral Kharia (deceased), uncles Balu Kharia (P. W. 5) and Rajwa Kharia (P. W. 7) proceeded for Khalihan. When they reached the Khalihan, the appellants, Charku Kharia, Birsaid Kharia, Sanichar Kharia, Kharia two Kharia came running, surrounded them. Charku was armed with a daw and the rest four with kulharas, Charku assaulted informants father (deceased) with daw whereinafter his father fell down. The accused also chased the informant and the uncle Charku gave daw blow on the back of the uncle, Rajwa Kharia (P. W. 7) from the blunt portion. Thereafter they ran away. The others, namely, Pachu Dukhia and Khudi Sao, Sarpanch (P. W. 8) also witnessed the occurrence. Belu Kharia (P. W. 5), uncle of the informant corroborated the aforesaid statement made by P. W. 4 (informant ). He stated that on the day of occurrence, he along with informant (P. W. 4), Rajwa Kharia (P. W. 7) and Mangra Kharia (deceased) proceeded for Khalihan on the call of Karmu Kharia (P. W. 6), the Adhbatai to take their share of the produce. He stated that on the day of occurrence, he along with informant (P. W. 4), Rajwa Kharia (P. W. 7) and Mangra Kharia (deceased) proceeded for Khalihan on the call of Karmu Kharia (P. W. 6), the Adhbatai to take their share of the produce. On reaching near the Khalihan in front of Devi Mandap, the accused (appellant) surrounded them, Charku Kharia was armed with daw and rest with Kulharas (axe ). Accused, Charku Kharia assaulted Mangra Kharia (deceased) with his daw on his head, who fell down and died instantly. They were also chased by the appellants and while chasing Charku Kharia also assaulted Rajwa Kharia (P. W. 7) from the blunt edge of daw on his back. ( 7 ) RAJWA Kharia (P. W. 7), brother of the deceased is the other witness, who corroborated the evidence of P. Ws. 4 and 5. He also stated that Karmu Kharia (P. W. 6) came and asked them to take their share on that day. He along with Mangra Kharia (deceased), Etwa Kharia (P. W. 4), informant and Dalu Kharia (P. W. 5), proceeded for Khalihan for taking their share. The accused-appellants surrounded them when they reached near the Khalihan, the appellant-Cherku Kharia was armed with a daw and the rest of the appellants had tangl (axe) in their hands. Charku Kharia assaulted Mangra Kharia (deceased) and gave blow on his head by daw. Mangra Kharia fell down and died. The appellants thereafter chased him and while running away Charku gave a daw blow from the blunt edge on his back. In his cross-examination, P. W. 7 accepted that the informant is his nephew, but stated that their messes are separated. ( 8 ) P. W. 2, Hemant Kumar, conducted post-mortem of Mangra Kharia on 6-10-1990 at Sadar Hospital, Gumla at about 1. 00 P. M. He found two incised wounds, one of the size 6" X 3" X brain deep on the head extending from left of forehead obliquely to medial side of right eye, cutting upper part of the nose, underline frontal and maxilla bone and the brain matter. Brain was conjusted and blood clots were present. Another incised wound over right arm of the size of 4" X 1" X 1". Brain was conjusted and blood clots were present. Another incised wound over right arm of the size of 4" X 1" X 1". Both the injuries were ante-mortem and injury No. 1, which was grievous, is stated to be the cause of death in ordinary course of nature due to shock and haemorrhage. It was opined that the injuries were caused by sharp cutting weapon like daw. He proved the post-mortem report (Ext. 4) and in his cross-examination, stated that the position of the dead body did not set in. The aforesaid evidence of P. W. 2 also corroborates the evidence of P. Ws. 4, 5, 7 and 8 to the extent of wound on the head and neck of the deceased. ( 9 ) KHUDI Sao (P. W. 8), Sarpanch is independent eye witness. He specifically stated that at the time of occurrence, he was in front of Devi Mandap, where his land is situated. He saw the appellants coming there. Charku was armed with daw and rest with Tangis (axe ). In the meantime, Mangra Kharia (deceased), Rajwa Kharia (P. W. 7), Balu Kharia (P. W. 5) and the informant came from village side. When they reached near the Devi Mandap, the appellant-Charku Kharia assaulted Mangra Kharia with daw on his neck and after receiving the blow, Mangra Kharia fell down and died. The appellants also chased the companions of Mangra Kharia. The evidence of independent witness P. W. 8 also strengthen the evidence of other eye-witnesses, namely, P. Ws. 4, 5, 6, 7. ( 10 ) THE motive has been well explained by the aforesaid witnesses particularly, P. Ws. 4 and 8. It is also stated in the F. I. R. that for ten years, there was litigation between Mangra Kharia accused and the appellants which was the reason to kill Mangra Kharia. ( 11 ) BJRA Bodra (P. W. 3) was the Officer-in-Charge who investigated the case. He explained the delay in sending dead body of Mangra Kharia for post mortem. The death took place on 3-10-1990 after about 4 P. M. and the F. I. R. was lodged on the very next day i. e. on 4-10-1990 at 2. 30 P. M. It was recorded by Bir Bahadur Singh. However, the police was on mass leave from 4-10-1990 to 6-10-1990, which was the reason to send the dead body for post-mortem on 6-10-1990. 30 P. M. It was recorded by Bir Bahadur Singh. However, the police was on mass leave from 4-10-1990 to 6-10-1990, which was the reason to send the dead body for post-mortem on 6-10-1990. ( 12 ) IN any case, even if the dead body was sent after 2-3 days of the murder, the F. I. R. having lodged in time and there being consistent evidence of witnesses, the appellants cannot derive any advantage. We find no reason to interfere with the judgment, order of conviction and sentence passed on 6-12-1991 by learned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Gumla in Sessions Trial No. 69/91. ( 13 ) THE appeal being devoid of merit, it is, accordingly, dismissed. ( 14 ) LAKSHMAN URAON, J. I agree. Appeal dismissed. --- *** --- .