M. C. JAIN, J. These two connected criminal appeals No. 883 of 1980 and 1238 of 1980 are being decided by this common judgment. In criminal appeal No. 883 of 1980 the appellant is Krishna Singh whereas Parmatma Nand Singh, Mahatma Nand Singh, Bachcha Singh and Babban Singh are the appellants in connected criminal appeal No. 1238 of 1980. The judgment assailed is one dated 19th April, 1980 passed by Sri S. C. Jain the then Sessions Judge, Ballia in Sessions Trial No. 4 of 1980. All of them have been convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC with sentence of life imprisonment, under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC with sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment and under Section 148 IPC with sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment. All the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. 2. One Bhanu Chand Singh was murdered in this incident and Haru Singh PW 3 received injuries. The incident occurred on 8-10-1979 at about 7. 45 a. m. in Mohalla Satkuiyan of village Chitbaragaon, Police Station Narhi, District Ballia and the F. I. R. was lodged the same day at 9 a. m. by eye-witness Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1. The distance of the police station was about 7 Km. The broad essentials of the case may be set forth. The informant Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1, deceased Bhanu Chand Singh and Ramesh Singh were real brothers and resided in town area of Chitbaragaon. Bhanu Chand Singh was a lecturer in Ballia Polytechnic while Ramesh Singh, who was the youngest, studied at Lucknow. Their father was ailing for the fast 4-5 years and Bhanu Chand Singh acted as Karta and manager of the family. All the appellants belonged to one family being closely related. Bachcha Singh and Babban Singh were real brothers. Parmatma Nand Singh and Mahatma Nand Singh are also brothers being sons of Krishna Singh, but Mahatma Nand Singh had been adopted by Bal Kishan Singh - uncle of Krishna Singh, Rajesh, real brother of Bachcha Singh and Babban Singh had been murdered for which Bhanu Chand Singh deceased, Dinesh Chand Singh and Ramesh were being prosecuted. They had been released on bail sometime before the occurrence. Because of the murder of Rajesh the accused appellants were highly annoyed with the deceased and his brothers and were on a look out to take revenge. They had been released on bail sometime before the occurrence. Because of the murder of Rajesh the accused appellants were highly annoyed with the deceased and his brothers and were on a look out to take revenge. On 8-10-1979 at about 7. 45 a. m. , the deceased Bhanu Chand Singh accompanied by his brother Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 started for railway station to go to Ballia. In the way, Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 sat for urination near the house of Ram Janam Koeri while Bhanu Chand Singh proceeded ahead. Haru Singh PW 3 was also proceeding by that route along with cattle. Bhanu Chand Singh crossed him near the house of Nagina Koeri while Dinesh Chand Singh PW1 further lagged behind. When Bhanu Chand Singh reached towards south west of the shop of Parashuram PW 7, the accused appellants emerged from behind the shop where they were laying in wait. Parmatma Nand Singh, Mahatma Nand Singh and Babban Singh were armed with countrymade pistols while Sri Kishan Singh and Bachcha Singh had knives. Babban Singh caught hold of Bhanu Chand Singh while Sri Kishan Singh and Bachcha Singh assaulted him with knives. He raised an alarm and Haru Singh PW 3 rushed forward to his rescue, whereupon shots were fired in quick succession. Bhanu Chand Singh fell down and succumbed to his injuries in no time. Haru Singh PW 3 also received gunshot injuries. As a result of alarm, the complainant Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1, Ram Janam, Ramayan Singh, Baijnath, Muni Singh and Triloki Singh appeared on the scene. The accused appellants made their escape good towards river side. After a couple of minutes, constables from police outpost appeared on the scene. A cot was arranged and the dead body of Bhanu Chand Singh was placed thereon and covered with a piece of cloth. The dead body was left in the supervision of constables and other persons who had assembled. Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 accompanied by the injured Haru Singh PW 3 went to the market scribed the FIR which he took to the police station in a taxi. The report was lodged there. A case was registered with the preparation of Chick Report by Head Constable Shiva Ji Singh PW 8. Haru Singh PW 3 was referred for medical examination. His injuries were examined by Dr. The report was lodged there. A case was registered with the preparation of Chick Report by Head Constable Shiva Ji Singh PW 8. Haru Singh PW 3 was referred for medical examination. His injuries were examined by Dr. P. N. Singh PW 4 the same morning at 9. 30 a. m. A gunshot injury was found on his left upper arm. He was referred to District Hospital Ballia, where he was operated upon in due course and bullet was taken out from his wound by Dr. N. B. L. Srivastava, PW 9. 3. The investigation was taken up by Rama Shankar Singh PW 10. The post mortem over the dead body of the deceased was conducted by Dr. B. K. Tripathi PW 5 on 8-10-1979 at 2 p. m. The deceased Bhanu Chand Singh was aged about 35 years and about half day had passed since he died. As many as 20 ante- mortem injuries were found on his person out of which injury Nos. 1 to 5 were incised wounds, injury No. 6 was abrasion while injuries Nos. 7 to 20 were gunshot wounds. Death had occurred due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante-mortem injuries. 4. The accused appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to have falsely been implicated due to enmity. 5. In support of its case, the prosecution in all examined ten witnesses. Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1, Triloki Nath Singh PW 2 and Haru Singh injured PW 3 were witnesses of fact. Parashuram PW 7 was the person in front of whose shop the occurrence had taken place. He himself was not the eye-witness. Rest were the Doctors and formal witnesses including the Investigating Officer. 6. The learned Sessions Judge found the case to be proved and rendered the impugned judgment of which the appellants are aggrieved and hence the present appeals before this Court. 7. In criminal appeal No. 883 of 1980, the appellant is represented by S/sri A. D. Giri G. P. Dixit and Jagdish Prasad Advocates. However, none appeared at the revision of the list. We have heard Sri A. K. Verma, learned A. G. A. for the State and have perused the record. In connected Criminal Appeal No. 1238 of 1980 Sri J. S. Audichya learned counsel for the appellants advanced arguments for the appellants and Sri A. K. Verma, learned A. G. A. on behalf of the State. We have heard Sri A. K. Verma, learned A. G. A. for the State and have perused the record. In connected Criminal Appeal No. 1238 of 1980 Sri J. S. Audichya learned counsel for the appellants advanced arguments for the appellants and Sri A. K. Verma, learned A. G. A. on behalf of the State. The record of the case is before us, which we have carefully perused. We propose to decide the appeal on merits dealing with the arguments raised at the bar in the light of the evidence and other material. 8. It has first been argued for the appellants that the FIR is ante-timed. It would be recalled that the incident occurred at about 7. 45 a. m. on 8-10-1979 and the report was lodged by Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 the same day at 9 a. m. at the police station the distance of which was about 7 Km. It has been urged that in view of the sequence of the events as narrated by Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 the FIR could not be lodged at 9 a. m. His statement has been referred to that after the murder he arranged for a cot and placed the dead body of Bhanu Chand Singh over the same. Certain constables from Chitbaragaon Police Outpost appeared on the scene and the dead body was left in their charge. Then he accompanied by Haru Singh PW 3 went to the Bazar and scribed the report at a tea stall of one Bhagat and thereafter both of them proceeded to police station and reached there at 9 a. m. It is urged that the distance of the police station being 7 Km. all the activities could not be possible within 75 minutes as the prosecution alleges. It is not possible for us to subscribe to this reasoning. It is pertinent to find that it has come in the testimony of Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 that he with Haru Singh PW 3 had gone to the police station in a taxi. It has been contended that it was stated by him for the first time in the Court that taxi had been used to reach the police station. Regard has to be made to the fact that this fact could not be there in the FIR which had been written by Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 in the Bazar. It has been contended that it was stated by him for the first time in the Court that taxi had been used to reach the police station. Regard has to be made to the fact that this fact could not be there in the FIR which had been written by Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 in the Bazar. He was placed in highly emotion ridden and tension packed situation having witnessed the ghastly murder of his won brother. We think that using a taxi he could well reach the police station at 9 a. m. There is another test which satisfies the judicial mind about the FIR having been lodged at 9 a. m. The injuries of Haru Singh PW 3 were examined by Dr. P. N. Singh PW 4 the same morning at 9. 30 a. m. after he had been referred for medical examination by the police. It has come down in the testimony of Dr. P. N. Singh PW 4 that the injured came to him with a letter of request for medical examination from police station. Head Constable Shiva Ji Singh PW 8 who prepared the Chik FIR has also stated that after recording the FIR, he sent the injured to Narhi Hospital for examination with a letter of request. This letter on record bears the crime number and sections of IPC under which the case was registered. Indeed, the injured with this letter could not be sent by the police to the Doctor for medical examination unless the FIR had already been lodged at the police station obviously, the medical examination of injured Haru Singh PW 3 on 8- 10-1979 at 9. 30 a. m. bears the most authentic and intrinsic evidence about the FIR having been lodged earlier thereto. We see no merit in the argument that the FIR was ante-timed. 9. We should also place it on the record that all the accused appellants being of the same family could very well join hands to take revenge of the murder of Rajesh, younger member of their family for which the deceased Bhanu Chand Singh was also an accused. Though it is a case of direct evidence of this broad daylight incident, yet it is to be taken note of that there was motive too on the part of the accused appellants to commit this crime. 10. Though it is a case of direct evidence of this broad daylight incident, yet it is to be taken note of that there was motive too on the part of the accused appellants to commit this crime. 10. It has next been argued for the appellants that actually Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 was not present at the spot and was later on called to pose as an eye-witness. The argument is sought to be strengthened by the submission that the accused appellants were equally aggrieved with him and in case he was really present at the time of occurrence, they would not have spared him unharmed. This reasoning ignores two important factors. First, it has been explained by this witness that while accompanying his deceased brother, he had lagged behind by about 30 paces as he had sat down to urinate near the house of Ram Janam Koeri and in the meantime, Bhanu Chand Singh had proceeded ahead. The accused appellants after coming out from their hiding place, first targeted Bhanu Chand Singh. Haru Singh PW 3 who was an unconcerned person and placed in between Bhanu Chand Singh and Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 rushed up to his rescue and also became the victim of the shot fired in quick succession by the appellants holding fire-arms. The second important factor is that after the murder of Bhanu Chand Singh, an alarm had been raised and a number of person had gathered on the scene. Under these circumstances, it was better for the accused appellants to have thought it better to escape rather than to prolong the whole matter by attacking this witness. They had already inflicted gunshot injury on an unconcerned person Haru Singh PW 3 during the course of the occurrence when he had rushed to the rescue of Bhanu Chand Singh. It was under these circumstances that after murdering Bhanu Chand Singh and injuring Haru Singh PW 3, the accused appellants retreated. The factum of Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 being not injured cannot, under the aforesaid circumstances, be a ground to reject his otherwise confidence inspiring testimony. 11. Learned counsel for the appellants then urged that only Triloki Nath Singh PW 2 has been examined and several other witnesses named in the FIR have not been produced. Suffice it to say in this regard that the prosecution is not supposed to multiply the evidence. 11. Learned counsel for the appellants then urged that only Triloki Nath Singh PW 2 has been examined and several other witnesses named in the FIR have not been produced. Suffice it to say in this regard that the prosecution is not supposed to multiply the evidence. The name of Triloki Nath Singh PW 2 does find place in the FIR and his testimony corroborating the version of Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1 and injured witness Haru Singh PW 3 strengthens the prosecution case against the appellants. To explain his presence at the spot, Triloki Nath Singh PW 2 stated that at the time of the incident, he was going to the market when he witnessed this incident. It has not been shown that he was either inimical towards the accused appellants or was on friendly terms with the deceased and his family. He ranks to be an independent witness who with stood the test of cross-examination firmly. 12. A doubt was then sought to be created as to the place of occurrence. It has been urged that the deceased had received 14 gunshot wounds out of which 7 were wounds of entry and 7 of exit. As such a number of shots must have been fired but on foreign material was found in the body of the deceased and as such pellets, wads etc. should have been found near the place of occurrence. The truth of the matter, however, is that the Investigating Officer did not find any such thing on the spot and it should, therefore, be inferred that the occurrence had not taken place at the complained place, viz. towards the south-west of the shop of Parashuram. We are of the view that the argument raising doubt about the place of occurrence is wholly imaginary. Rama Shanker Singh PW 10 who investigated the case, well explained that when he reached the scene, huge crowd had gathered on the spot. He therefore, could not find any pellets, wads etc. near the place of occurrence. It was Kachcha road and when a large number of persons had treaded over thereafter the incident, the possibility of finding pellets, wads etc. was wholly remote. A little thing like pellet would have got lost in the dust of kachcha road. He therefore, could not find any pellets, wads etc. near the place of occurrence. It was Kachcha road and when a large number of persons had treaded over thereafter the incident, the possibility of finding pellets, wads etc. was wholly remote. A little thing like pellet would have got lost in the dust of kachcha road. In fact, the testimony of Parashuram PW 7 is of great importance in proving beyond doubt that the incident occurred at the place alleged by the prosecution. It was in front of his shop that the occurrence had taken place. Of course, at the time of the incident, this witness was not present at his shop. According to him, at that day he opened the shop at about 6 a. m. He had also to look after another shop situated in the bazar. He seated his sisters son aged about 9-10 years and left the shop at about 7 a. m. By that time, no occurrence had taken place. In the market there was an alarm at about 8 a. m. that a murder had taken place in front of his shop. He then rushed to the scene and found the dead body of Bhanu Chand Singh lying there. Out of fear he closed the shop and went away. But it was again opened by him when he was called by the Investigating Officer at about 12 O clock in the noon. 13. The learned counsel for the appellants then urged that the incident had taken place much before the time of incident alleged by the prosecution under the cover of darkness. He wanted to support this argument by three factors. Firstly, it has been pointed out that Dr. B. K. Tripathi PW 5 who conducted the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased stated in his cross-examination that death might have occurred at 4 a. m. Secondly, all the injuries of the deceased had been sustained on right side which could have been sustained by him while he was sleeping turning to left with right side of the body exposed upward. Thirdly, though he had started from his house early in the morning at about 7. Thirdly, though he had started from his house early in the morning at about 7. 30 a. m. for going to Ballia by train, but the post mortem report shows that large intestine of the deceased was full of faecal matter, meaning there by that he had not eased by the time he was murdered. It is urged that had he started from his house in the morning at 7. 30 a. m. he would have done so after easing himself. None of the contentions has the attraction of logic. The simple possibility that the death could have occurred at about 4 a. m. , cannot and does not overshadow and eclipse the positive and clinching eye-witness account that it had taken place at about 7. 45 a. m. As we have ruled above, the place of occurrence is established as being near the shop of Parshuram. It would be preposterous to suggest that the deceased would have been sleeping turning to left side at that spot. He could not possibly be lying on the Kachcha road. It was just by chance that the injuries were sustained by him on right side of his body. The accused appellants had pounced upon him all of sudden and his right side being within their reach, the injuries were inflicted on that side. So far as contents of large intestine of the deceased are concerned, it should be noted that the things are crystal clear on careful perusal of statement of Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1. He has explained that he got up first and then woke up Bhanu Chand Singh who then started alongwith him without easing himself. In a hurry to board the train, Bhanu Chand Singh left his house without easing himself and it explains away the condition of his large intestine. 14. On examining the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellants, we do not locate merits in any of them. The prosecution version is supported by as many as three witnesses, namely, Dinesh Chand Singh PW 1, Triloki Nath Singh PW 2 (an independent witness named in the FIR) and injured witness Haru Singh PW 3, whose testimony as injured is of great value. Three of the appellants used fire-arms while two others wielded knives. The ante-mortem injuries sustained by the deceased and gunshot injuries sustained by the injured witness could have been sustained by such weapons. Three of the appellants used fire-arms while two others wielded knives. The ante-mortem injuries sustained by the deceased and gunshot injuries sustained by the injured witness could have been sustained by such weapons. As many as five incised wounds had been sustained by the deceased which were capable of being caused by knives. One ante-mortem injury was abrasion while injuries No. 7 to 20 were gunshot wounds. 7 wounds of entry with equal number of exit were there. The injury of Haru Singh PW 3 was also of gunshot on front of left upper arm wherefrom a bullet had also been taken out. The ocular testimony reconciles with the medical evidence. It was a broad daylight incident in which one person was murdered with cruelty and the other one who mustered up courage to come to the rescue of the deceased, also sustained gunshot injury. The accused appellants belonging to one and the same family committed this murder with planning, forming an unlawful assembly with deadly weapons. Their guilt has rightly been found to be established to the hilt by the Court below and we see no ground, whatsoever, to interfere. 15. We would record here that the parties professed to compound the offences. In view of the law, we are of the opinion that the so-called compounding of the offences by the parties is of no consequence at all. The Legislature, in its wisdom, and rightly, has categorized the offences of rioting, murder and attempt to murder as non-compoundable even with the permission of the Court. Such offences create a sense of abhorrence in the society and affect the general public. It is for this reason that they have been categorized to be non-compoundable under any circumstance. Therefore, the compounding of the offences by the parties has to be ignored. We should, however, observe that two of the appellants of Criminal Appeal No. 1238 of 1980, namely, Bachcha Singh and Babban Singh have died during the pendency of the appeal, as borne out from the record. Therefore, the appeal abates so far as they are concerned. 16. Our final order is as under : Criminal Appeal No. 1238 of 1980 abates so far as the appellants Babban Singh and Bachcha Singh are concerned. Therefore, the appeal abates so far as they are concerned. 16. Our final order is as under : Criminal Appeal No. 1238 of 1980 abates so far as the appellants Babban Singh and Bachcha Singh are concerned. The two Criminal Appeals No. 883 of 1980 (filed by Krishna Singh) and 1238 of 1980 in respect of appellants No. 1 and 2 (Parmatma Nand Singh and Mahatma Nand Singh) are dismissed. Their conviction under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC with sentence of life imprisonment, under Section 307 read with Section 149 IPC with sentence of 5 years rigorous imprisonment and under Section 148 IPC with sentence two years rigorous imprisonment are confirmed. They are on bail. They shall be arrested and lodged in jail to serve out the sentences passed against them, which shall run concurrently. The office shall send a copy of this judgment to the Court below alongwith the record for reporting compliance of this Court within two months. Decided accordingly. .