K. N. OJHA, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal has been preferred against the order of conviction and sentence dated 17-6-1980 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hamirpur in Sessions Trial No. 218 of 1979, State v. Siddha Gopal and three others, by which accused Siddha Gopal and Chiranji Lal have been convicted under Section 323, I. P. C. and accused Ram Sewak and Kalkai have been convicted under Section 323 read with Section 34, I. P. C. and all of them have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year. Accused Ram Sewak and Halkai are further convicted under Section 324, I. P. C. and accused Siddha Gopal and Chiranji Lal are convicted under Section 324 read with Section 34, I. P. C. and all of them have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years. All these four accused persons have further been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34, I. P. C. and each one of them is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. By the impugned order, the sentences are to run concurrently. The charge against the appellant is that on 26-2-1979 at about sun set in the Geonda Har of village Imiliya, near Ghutai railway station, P. S. Mahobkhanth, District Hamirpur, in furtherance of their common intention, all the appellants committed murder of Ram Dayal and besides it on 27-2-1979 at about sun set in village Imiliya on the path behind the house of Tejjan situate in Mahobkhanth, District Hamirpur, accused Ram Sewak and Halkai caused simple injuries to Mohan Lal with Farsa and accused Siddha Gopal and Chiranji Lal caused simple injuries to Mohan Lal with lathis. ( 2 ) THE F. I. R. was lodged against all the appellants by Bhagwan Das, brother of deceased Ram Dayal, under Section 304/324/323, I. P. C. at G. R. P. outpost Mahoba, District Hamirpur on 27-2-1979 at 2. 30 p. m. As a consequence of it Mohan Lal was medically examined in State Hospital, Charkhari, District Hamirpur on 28-2-1979 at 8. 00 pm. and the following injuries were found on his body. :- 1) Lacerated wound 2 cms x 1/2 cm x muscle deep in left side of forehead, just above eye-brow at outer end. Margins irregular and torn with sepsis (pus), plenty of lymph collection were seen. 00 pm. and the following injuries were found on his body. :- 1) Lacerated wound 2 cms x 1/2 cm x muscle deep in left side of forehead, just above eye-brow at outer end. Margins irregular and torn with sepsis (pus), plenty of lymph collection were seen. 2) Incised wound 6 cms x 1/2 cm x. muscle deep in the middle of scalp, front to back direction, 9 cms. above right eyebrow margins were sharp and clean with lymph and sepsis. (3) Incised wound 5 cms x 1/2 cm. x muscle deep, 4 cms behind injury No. 2. Margins were sharp and clean with lymph and pus. 4) Incised wound 4 cms x 1/2 cm x muscle deep in right side of scalp 6 cms. above eye-brow, direction front to back, margins were sharp and clean, with lymph and pus. 5) Blue contusion 4 cms x 2 cms. below the right shoulder blade upside down. 6) Scabbed abrasion blackish brown in colour, 1 cm x 1 cm on centre of left collar bone. 7) Scabbed abrasion blackish brown in colour, 2 cm x 1 cm. just below the left deltoid muscle. 8) Blue contusion 5 cms x 2 cms, in left, thigh at outer and upper 3rd part. 9) Blue contusion 4 cm. x 11/2 cms in left calf muscle upside down. 10) Conjunctural haemorrhage and blackness of eye present. ( 3 ) IN the opinion of the Doctor all the injuries were simple. Injuries No. 1, 5, 8 and 9 were caused by blunt object like lathis and injuries No. 2 , 3 and 4 were caused by sharp edged weapon like Farsa and injuries No. 6 and 7 were possible from friction. ( 4 ) POST-MORTEM examination on the dead body of Ram Dayal was done by Dr. G. S. Pandey in State Hospital Charkari, District Hamirpur on 28-2-1979 at 12. 10 pm. In the opinion of the Doctor he was aged about 50 years. Following ante-mortem injuries were found on his body. :- 1) Abrasion 2 cm x 1 cm on right side of chest near sternum at 4th intercostal space. 2) Lacerated wound 4 cm x 1 1/2 cms, on right side of skull, 10 cms. above right ear. Margins jagged, underneath parietal bone was depressed and fractured, plenty of blood was seen over the membranes and blood clots were present in cranial cavity. 2) Lacerated wound 4 cm x 1 1/2 cms, on right side of skull, 10 cms. above right ear. Margins jagged, underneath parietal bone was depressed and fractured, plenty of blood was seen over the membranes and blood clots were present in cranial cavity. 3) Compound fracture of left fore arm, just below elbow wound lying on back side. Both bones fractured at upper third part. Size of wound 21/2 cms. 1 cm. with laceration. 4) Contusion 3 cms. x 1 cm in dorsum of left palm. 5) Lacerated wound 4 cms. x 2 cms. in back and outer aspect of right fore arm, just below elbow joint, underlying both bones fractured. 6) Lacerated wound 5 cms x 11/2 cms on right leg 6 cms. below knee joint, both bones were fractured beneath the wound. 7) Incised wound 4 cms. x 2 cms. x muscle deep in right leg, 4 cms, below injury No. 6. 8) Lacerated wound 1 cm x 1/2 cm. below 4th toe on left foot at base. Margins were irregular and torn. 9) Abrasion 2 cms x 1 cm. in dorsum of right great toe. 10) Multiple abrasions in an area of 6 cms x 4 cms. infront and outer aspect of left leg, 5 cms. below knee joint. 11. Abrasion 1 cm x 1 cm. on middle of dorsum of right middle finger. 12. Abrasion 1 cm. x 1/2 cm. on dorsum of left ring finger at middle. ( 5 ) ON internal examination the doctor found brain and membranes and both the lungs congested. Stomach was empty. Small intestine contained digested food material and the large intestine contained faceal matter. The urinary bladder was empty. In the opinion of the doctor the death of Ram Dayal occurred on 27-2-1979 at about 1. 00 p. m. due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of head injuries. ( 6 ) ACCUSED Ram Sewak is son of accused Siddha Gopal, Chiranji Lal and Halkai are real brothers and are allegedly associates of Siddha Gopal, Ram Dayal, deceased, was brother of P. W. 6 Bhagwan Das and real brother of injured witness P. W. 3 Mohan Lal, Ram Dayal was a railway Train Driver. Ram Dayal used to remain out on his duty and some times visited his village to look after his cultivation. Ram Dayal used to remain out on his duty and some times visited his village to look after his cultivation. Before the murder of Ram Dayal the litigation in Revenue Court was going on and lastly it was decided by the Board of Revenue in favour of Ram Dayal. Hence, Siddha Gopal was nursing bad blood against Ram Dayal and his family members. ( 7 ) ACCORDING to prosecution, Smt. Laxmi Bai, wife of complainant Bhagwan Das and Smt. Ram Rati, wife of Ram Dayal had gone to scrap grass outside the village Abadi near Ghutai railway station, which is at a distance of about half km. from the village Abadi (Imiliya ). At about 3. 30 p. m. Bhagwan Das, and his brother Ram Dayal got down from the train, at railway station Ghutai and while they were going to the house, on the way they saw, the ladies of their family hence they started enjoying parched green grams. In the meantime, Smt. Ganeshi Bai, another Jethani of Smt. Laxmi Bai came running and informed, that the accused persons had caused injuries to Mohan Lal, her son, and they were coming armed with lathis and Farsa to kill Bhagwan Das and Ram Dayal. On this Bhagwan Das ran away towards village Roori while Ram Dayal towards Ghutai railway station, but, all the accused chased Ram Dayal, who reached near the sign board of Ghutai railway station and caused injuries to Ram Dayal as a result of which he became unconscious. Smt. Laxmi Bai and Smt. Ram Rati were following the assailants and saw the incident and found that Ram Dayal was unconscious. They carried Ram Dayal to Mahoba by train. From there they carried Ram Dayal to District Hospital, Mahoba, where doctor advised to carry him to Jhansi. They came back to railway station and were waiting for train, but Ram Dayal died at the railway station, Mahoba. Then F. I. R. was lodged at crime No. 0/79 at G. R. P. Mahoba, which was sent to Police station Mahobkanth. It was registered there at crime No. 11/79 under Section 304/324/323, I. P. C. against all the four accused persons. The Investigating Officer reached the spot, prepared site plan, took blood stained and plain earth from behind the house of Tejjan, where Mohan Lal was injured. It was registered there at crime No. 11/79 under Section 304/324/323, I. P. C. against all the four accused persons. The Investigating Officer reached the spot, prepared site plan, took blood stained and plain earth from behind the house of Tejjan, where Mohan Lal was injured. He prepared the site plan of the place near railway station where Ram Dayal was injured. The inquest report was also prepared and after recording the statement of the witnesses under Section 161, Cr. P. C. the charge sheet was submitted against all the four accused persons. ( 8 ) THE prosecution examined P. W. 1 Smt. Laxmi Bai, wife of Bhagwan Das informant, P. W. 2 Smt. Ganeshi Bai, wife of Shanker Lal,p. W. 3 Mohan Lal injured, P. W. 6 Bhagwan Das is eye witness of the occurrence, who has supported the prosecution story. P. W. 4 Shiv Shanker Pandey is head moharrir of police station Mahobkanth. P. W. 5 is Dr. G. S. Pandey, who examined the injuries of Mohan Lal and performed autospy on the dead body of Ram Dayal and has proved the post-mortem examination report, P. W. 7 Ram Ashish Singh is the Investigating Officer, who prepared the inquest report (Ex. Ka-9), took blood stained and plain earth from the place of the occurrence, P. W. 8 Malkhan Singh is the Station Officer, Police Station Mahobkanth, who has stated that F. I. R. was received from G. R. P. Mahoda and was registered at Police Station Mahobkanth, recorded the statement of the witnesses, prepared site plan, visited the place of occurrence and submitted the charge sheet. ( 9 ) THE case of Chiranji Lal, accused appellant, is that he and his brother Halkai have no concern with co-accused Siddha Gopal and the same is alleged by Siddha Gopal also but according to accused Siddha Gopal and his son Ram Sewak, a case was pending between the victim and Siddha Gopal. Siddha Gopal and Ram Sewak had won the case and it is wrong to say that the victim Ram Dayal had won the case. It is denied that the injury was caused to Mohan Lal and murder of Ram Dayal was committed by the accused persons. Siddha Gopal and Ram Sewak had won the case and it is wrong to say that the victim Ram Dayal had won the case. It is denied that the injury was caused to Mohan Lal and murder of Ram Dayal was committed by the accused persons. ( 10 ) AFTER appreciating the evidence, the impugned order of conviction and sentence has been passed against each of the appellants, who have preferred this appeal on the ground that there is inordinate delay in lodging the F. I. R. occurrence was not seen by the witnesses and due to enmity the accused appellants have falsely been implicated in this case. The F. I. R. suffers from deliberation and consultation. It is also alleged that Mohan Lal was not inside his house but was going to his house from the field. All the accused appellants cannot be said to have common intention to commit murder of Ram Dayal. ( 11 ) WE have heard learned counsel for the accused appellants, learned A. G. A. and have gone through the record. ( 12 ) IN this case the occurrence is said to have taken place behind the residence of Tejjan, a resident of the same village Imiliya, which is at a distance of 40 steps from the residence of the victim. Another incident is said to have taken place for chasing Ram Dayal and causing injuries to him near Ghutai railway station. In order to prove the occurrence and the injuries being caused to Mohan Lal, P. W. 2 Ganeshi Bai and P. W. 3 Mohan Lal, have consistantly stated that due to enmity of litigation pending between the parties, all the four appellants went at the door of Mohan Lal, called him to come out of his house to which Mohan Lal told that he would come out after taking his meal but Siddha Gopal and Chiranji Lal entered his house and dragged Mohan Lal out of the door, and Siddha Gopal thrashed lathi blows on him. Thereafter Chiranji Lal also caused injuries with lathis and after him Ram Sewak and Halkai caused injuries with Farsa after carrying him on the backside of the house of Tejjan and when he became unconscious and they thought that he was dead, they ran towards the field where Ram Dayal and Bhagwan Das were enjoying parched green grams. Thereafter Chiranji Lal also caused injuries with lathis and after him Ram Sewak and Halkai caused injuries with Farsa after carrying him on the backside of the house of Tejjan and when he became unconscious and they thought that he was dead, they ran towards the field where Ram Dayal and Bhagwan Das were enjoying parched green grams. The injuries of Mohan Lal were caused on 27-2-1979 when it was about sun set. The accused persons had called for Mohan Lal to come out of his house. They are residents of the same village and have enmity with the victim. Therefore, it cannot be doubted that these were the accused persons, who dragged Mohan Lal and caused injuries to him. Even after sun set there remains some light of sun, in which all persons can be seen. Therefore, it cannot be believed that the assailants were unknown persons and his mother could not see the real culprits. As many as ten injuries in the nature of lacerated wound, abrasion and incised wounds were caused to Mohan Lal. These injuries were caused by lathis and Farsa and not by fire arm or from a distant place. It was not only one injury which was caused but as many as ten injuries were found on the body of Mohan Lal. The reason of injuries being caused was that litigation was pending between the parties in respect of landed property. Therefore, the statement of P. W. 2 Ganeshi Bai, the mother of the victim Mohan Lal and P. W. 3 Mohan Lal deserves to be believed that injuries were caused by all the four appellants. ( 13 ) THE learned counsel for the appellants has submitted that there is no independent witness of injuries being caused to Mohan Lal. There is statement of P. W. 2 Smt. Ganeshi Bai and P. W. 3 Mohan Lal that the persons living in the vicinity, had closed their door from inside and no one could pick up courage to come to the place of the occurrence. If the witnesses of the locality are not appearing to support the statement of P. W. 2 Smt. Ganeshi Bai and P. W. 3 Mohan Lal on this ground, their statement cannot be disbelieved, of course it deserves greater scrutiny. If the witnesses of the locality are not appearing to support the statement of P. W. 2 Smt. Ganeshi Bai and P. W. 3 Mohan Lal on this ground, their statement cannot be disbelieved, of course it deserves greater scrutiny. ( 14 ) THE Investigating Officer reached the spot and prepared site plan of the place where Mohan Lal was injured. The site plan is Ex. Ka 3, blood was found on the spot and the doctor who medically examined Mohan Lal, has proved the injuries. P. W. 5 Dr. G. S. Pandey has stated that these injuries could be caused from Lathi and Farsa and its duration at the time of examination, was about 2 days. Thus, the prosecution evidence has rightly been believed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge that accused Siddha Gopal and Chiranji Lal caused injuries with lathi to Mohan Lal and accused Ram Sewak and Halkai caused injuries to Mohan Lal with Farsa in furtherance of their common intention. ( 15 ) IT is prosecution case that all the four accused chased Ram Dayal and Bhagwan Das who were enjoying parched green gram in the field which is outside abadi of village Imiliya. Bhagwan Das escaped injuries because he was successful in running away towards village Roori and Ram Dayal ran towards the railway station Ghutai but he was over powered by accused persons near the sign board of railway station Ghutai and all the accused persons caused injuries to him with Lathi and Farsa as a result of which he became unconscious. Accused ran away, he was carried to Mahoba railway station by night train, and stayed in the waiting room at the railway station and from there was carried to District Hospital but the doctor advised to carry him to Jhansi for better medical treatment as the injuries were serious. This statement has been supported by P. W. 1 Laxmi Bai wife of Bhagwan Das and P. W. 2 Smt. Ganeshi Bai. P. W. 6 Bhagwan Das has also supported the fact of being chased by the accused persons and when he ran towards village Roori the accused chased Ram Dayal and caused injuries to him, later on resulting into his death. Post-mortem examination report (Ex. P. W. 6 Bhagwan Das has also supported the fact of being chased by the accused persons and when he ran towards village Roori the accused chased Ram Dayal and caused injuries to him, later on resulting into his death. Post-mortem examination report (Ex. Ka-7) shows that as many as twelve injuries were caused to Ram Dayal aged about 50 years which were in the nature of abrasion, lacerated wound, contusion, incised wound etc. It means that the injuries by sharp edged and blunt object were caused to Ram Dayal and all the accused persons actively participated in causing the injuries to Ram Dayal. When there is statement of P. W. 2 Smt. Ganeshi Bai that injuries were caused to Mohan Lal and the appellants were going to cause injuries to Bhagwan Das and Ram Dayal and later on P. W. 1 Smt. Laxmi Bai and Smt. Ram Rati her Jethani saw that the appellants were chasing Ram Dayal, who ran towards railway station and later on it was found that injuries were found on the body of Ram Dayal, who had become unconscious and he succumbed to the injuries. The circumstances are sufficient to believe that the injuries were caused by the accused persons resulting into the death of Ram Dayal. When there is sufficient light to go to the door of the victim to call for him to come out of his house and for chasing victims Ram Dayal and Bhagwan Das, it means there was sufficient light to see the persons, who were chasing Ram Dayal and had caused injuries to him. Therefore, the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants cannot be believed that the injuries were caused in some dark hour of night and the real culprits could not be seen. The statement of the witnesses is consistent and if at some place, there appears any contradiction between the statement of the witnesses, made before the Court and under Section 161, Cr. P. C. on the basis of these minor contradictions, the statement of the witnesses cannot be disbelieved. ( 16 ) THE learned counsel for the appellants submits that the occurrence is said to have taken place on 26-2-1979 at sunset while the F. I. R. was lodged on 27-2-1979 at 2. P. C. on the basis of these minor contradictions, the statement of the witnesses cannot be disbelieved. ( 16 ) THE learned counsel for the appellants submits that the occurrence is said to have taken place on 26-2-1979 at sunset while the F. I. R. was lodged on 27-2-1979 at 2. 30 p. m. Thus, according to the appellants, there is inordinate delay in lodging F. I. R. and the F. I. R. suffers from deliberation and consultation. The circumstances are clear that Ram Dayal was chased and injuries were caused on 26-2-1979 at about sunset. He was carried to the railway station, wherefrom the train was boarded by Ram Dayal in unconscious condition and he was brought to Mahoba by the train and from there he was carried on Tanga to the hospital, but when the Doctor told that his condition was serious and he be carried to Jhansi for medical treatment, Ram Dayal was again brought back to Mahoba railway station and the train was being waited for Jhansi. In these circumstances, the F. I. R. was got written at G. R. P. Mahoba on 27-2-1979 at 2. 30 p. m. When the life of an injured is in danger, his relatives or the family members, first make effort for saving the life rather than F. I. R. being lodged against the persons causing injuries. Therefore, if the efforts were being made for carrying Ram Dayal to Jhansi and the delay did take place in lodging the F. I. R. , the delay is sufficiently explained and there is no circumstance from which it may be inferred that the F. I. R. was delayed and deliberate. ( 17 ) THE witnesses have stated that the injuries were caused to Ram Dayal near Mahobkanth railway station. The Investigating Officer reached the spot and has prepared site-plan (Ex. Ka-14 ). P. W. 8 Police Sub-Inspector Malkhan Singh has stated that he inspected the platform of Ghutai Railway Station near which the injuries were caused to Ram Dayal, later on resulting into his death, and prepared site-plan. P. W. 5 Dr. G. S. Pandey has stated that he performed autopsy on the dead body of Ram Dayal on 28-2-1979 at 12. 10 p. m. and the death of Ram Dayal was possible to have taken place on 27-2-1979 at about 1. 00 p. m. from the injuries found on his body. P. W. 5 Dr. G. S. Pandey has stated that he performed autopsy on the dead body of Ram Dayal on 28-2-1979 at 12. 10 p. m. and the death of Ram Dayal was possible to have taken place on 27-2-1979 at about 1. 00 p. m. from the injuries found on his body. Thus, the ocular evidence of the eye-witnesses is supported by the medical report, postmortem examination report and the investigation. ( 18 ) IT has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the injuries are said to have been caused on the back side of the house of Tejjan and near Ghutai Railway Station, but no blood was found on the spot by the Investigating Officer. P. W. 8 Malkhan Singh was the Sub-Inspector Mahobkanth, district Hamirpur. He has stated the he made investigation of the crime, reached the spot, prepared the site-plan of both the places, where Mohan Lal and Ram Dayal were injured. He has also stated that on investigation, he found the blood on the spot and he mentioned this fact in the site-plan by letter "a" where Mohan Lal was injured. Two site-plans were prepared by him and at both the places blood was found by him, though he could not specifically mention that the blood was found at place "a". Thus, the place of occurrence cannot be doubted, where the injuries were caused to Mohan Lal and Ram Dayal. ( 19 ) THE learned counsel for the appellants further submitted that there is no eye-witness of the injuries being caused by accused persons to Ram Dayal. The evidence of the witnesses shows that all the four accused appellants caused injuries to Mohan Lal and then they chased Bhagwan Das and Ram Dayal and ultimately they overpowered Ram Dayal. The ladies of their family were behind the accused persons, but they were successful in causing the injuries to Ram Dayal and the injuries were so much in number and so grievous in nature that ultimately Ram Dayal died. If railway employees did not come to the rescue of the victim Ram Dayal, it does not mean that some persons other than the accused appellants had caused injuries to Ram Dayal, resulting into his death. If railway employees did not come to the rescue of the victim Ram Dayal, it does not mean that some persons other than the accused appellants had caused injuries to Ram Dayal, resulting into his death. Learned counsel for the appellants has cited 1992 All Cri R 479: 1993 Cri LJ 426), Nadodi Jayaraman v. State of Tamil Nadu, in which it has been held by Hon. the Supreme Court that if there is no common intention to cause death beyond reasonable doubt, the conclusion cannot be drawn that all the accused appellants shared to commit murder. In the instant case, it is said that only one incised wound was caused to Ram Dayal and, thus, the persons having Farsa, had no intention to commit murder of Ram Dayal. As many as 12 injuries were caused to Ram Dayal and injury No. 7 is in the nature of incised wound, rest appear to have been caused by lathis, but these were the accused, who had caused injuries some minutes before to Mohan Lal to whom 10 injuries were caused, out of which 3 injuries were incised in nature on scalp and eyebrow and rest injuries were caused by lathis. They left Mohan Lal, when they understood that he had died but he remained unconscious for two days and he survived and he had to remain in hospital for a month. Thus, the nature and the number of the injuries caused by the appellants, show that if they would not have common intention to commit murder, they would not have chased Ram Dayal and Bhagwan Das. They were firm-determined in their common intention and when they understood that Mohan Lal had died, even then they were not satisfied and went towards field area at a distance of about half kilometer from the residence of victim and chased Ram Dayal. Bhagwan Das escaped by concealing himself in other direction but they chased Ram Dayal and ultimately caused injuries resulting into his death. This conduct of the accused appellants, the number and nature of the injuries, show that they had common intention to commit murder of Mohan Lal, Bhagwan Das and Ram Dayal. Injuries caused to Mohan Lal and Ram Dayal were consequent to the same transaction because after causing injuries to Mohan Lal, the injuries were caused to Ram Dayal near Ghutai railway station platform, which is about 1 Km. Injuries caused to Mohan Lal and Ram Dayal were consequent to the same transaction because after causing injuries to Mohan Lal, the injuries were caused to Ram Dayal near Ghutai railway station platform, which is about 1 Km. from abadi of village Imiliya. The common intention of the appellants make them responsible for the crime, committed by each member. Thus, in the instant case, common intention to cause death is proved. Another case cited by the appellants is (1991) 28 All Cri C 604: (1991 Cri LJ 3939), Parsuraman v. State of Tamil Nadu, in which it had been held by Hon. the Supreme Court that when the appellants participated in the occurrence resulting into the death of the deceased, even 13 external injuries were found on the body, the offence comes within the parameters of Sec. 325 and not under Section 304, Part I of the Indian Penal Code, because 11 out of 13 injuries, caused by the appellants were found on legs and arms. In the instant case the position is otherwise. The injuries to Ram Dayal were caused on chest, scalp, arms palm, forearm, knee joint, finger of arms etc. , and these injuries were not minor in nature, compound fracture was on forearm and lacerated wound on scalp etc. Incised wounds were caused to Mohan Lal on skull and lacerated wound was on forehead, right shoulder, eye etc. Thus, the seat of the injuries on the body of the victims, show that the appellants had not inflicted the injuries to avoid death of the victims. Injuries were such that the appellants had common intention to commit murder. ( 20 ) IN view of the above discussion we subscribe to the findings, arrived at by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hamirpur and the order of the conviction and sentences are affirmed. ( 21 ) THE appeal preferred by accused appellants Chiranji Lal, Ram Sewak and Halkai is dismissed. Since accused appellant Siddha Gopal has died, hence his appeal abates. The appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds are cancelled. They be taken into custody and sent to Jail to serve out the sentences. ( 22 ) LET the copy of this judgment along with the record be sent down to the trial Court for compliance and report to this Court within two months. Appeal dismissed. . .