K. N. OJHA, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal has been preferred against judgement and order dated 18-8-80, passed by Sri S. K. Saxena, VII Additional Sessions Judge, Meerut in Sessions Trial No. 335 of 1979 by which all the above five appellants were convicted and each one of them was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Section 149, I. P. C. Report was received from the police station concerned through C. J. M. that during the pendency of the appeal appellants Afsar and Hanif died. Therefore, their appeal stands abated so far as they are concerned. ( 2 ) WE have heard Sri D. N. Wali, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri A. K. Varma, learned A. G. A. and have gone through the record. ( 3 ) ACCORDING to prosecution, murder of Sajid Husain, resident of village Jaroda, police station Kithor, District Meerut, was committed by the appellants, who are residents of the same village, on 29-5-79 at 6. 30 P. M. in village Bhadoli, P. S. Kithore, district Meerut. The place of occurrence is about 6 Km. from the police station. F. I. R. was lodged by Arshad Husain, real brother of deceased Sajid Husain on 29-5-79 at 9. 30 P. M. under Section 147/302, I. P. C. against the appellants. ( 4 ) IT is alleged that Sajid Hussain, aged about 50 years, was Pradhan of village Jaroda. A piece of land was allotted to one person, but appellants Afzal and masood had filed case in the Court of Assistant Collector, Meerut, for cancellation of lease as they wanted Patta of the land in their own favour. The case was pending against Land Management Committee, village Jaroda. Deceased Sajid Husain was actively making Pairvi against Afzal and Masood appellants. 29-5-79 was fixed in the case in the Court of Assistant Collector, Meerut. Sajid Husain along with Mahboob Husain and Arshad Husain were coming back from the Court on their bicycles. They took their bicycles from the residence of Mool Chand, where they had kept and then they were coming on bicycles. At about 6. 30 P. M. , they reached near "peer" existing between Mahalwala and Jaroda village. Appellants came on the path, who were concealing themselves behind "peer" and were waiting for these three persons. They took their bicycles from the residence of Mool Chand, where they had kept and then they were coming on bicycles. At about 6. 30 P. M. , they reached near "peer" existing between Mahalwala and Jaroda village. Appellants came on the path, who were concealing themselves behind "peer" and were waiting for these three persons. The informant and Mahboob Husain ran towards village Jaroda and Sajid Husain left his bicycle and ran towards west side. Appellants chased Sajid Husain, fire was also made on Sajid Husain, who fell down on the earth, where appellants caused injuries to him, who died on the spot. On the alarm, witnesses Ayaz Mohammad, Sabir Husain and many other persons of village Jaroda, reached there, who saw the appellants committing murder and running away towards village Govindpur. ( 5 ) INVESTIGATION was started by police sub-inspector Ganga Ram Nagar, who took one pair shoe of accused Hanif, which was left there while running away from the place. Besides it, blood stained, plain earth and used cartridges were recovered from the place of occurrence. Inquest report was prepared. ( 6 ) POST mortem examination on the dead body of Sajid Husain was got done in mortuary of P. L. Sharma Hospital Meerut, district Meerut, by Doctor G. C. Agrawal on 30-5-79 at 4. 00 P. M. Rigor mortis was present all over the body. There was no decomposition in the body. Bleeding was present in right ear and nostrils. There were multiple fractures of skull bones. Membrances and brain were lacerated. Base of skull was fractured. Pellets and wadding pieces were found in brain substance. Half digested food about 150 Gm. was present in the stomach. Following ante-mortem injuries were found on the dead body of Sajid Husain :-1. Gun shot wound of Entry 2. 5 cm. x 2 c. m x brain deep on right temporal region. Blackening and scorching was present. 2. Lacerated wound 3 cm. x 1 cm. x bone deep on right side head, 5 cm. above right ear. 3. Lacerated wound 3 cm. x 1 cm. x bone deep, on right side back of neck, 4 cm. behind right ear. 4. Lacerated wound 4 cm. x cm. x 1 bone deep, on left side forehead verticle. 5. Lacerated wound 5 cm. x 2 cm. x bone deep, on left side head, 10 cm. above left ear. 6. Contusion 24 cm. x 1 cm. x bone deep, on right side back of neck, 4 cm. behind right ear. 4. Lacerated wound 4 cm. x cm. x 1 bone deep, on left side forehead verticle. 5. Lacerated wound 5 cm. x 2 cm. x bone deep, on left side head, 10 cm. above left ear. 6. Contusion 24 cm. x 11 cm. outerback of right upper arm, extending to elbow. There was fracture of humerus bone in middle. 7. Lacerated wound 1 cm. x 1/2 cm. x bone deep on right little finger-palmer surface. 8. Contusion 13 cm. x 6 c. m back of left upper arm lower part. 9. Lacerated wound 1 cm. x 1 cm. x muscle deep, back of left elbow - 1/2 cm. above. 10. Contusion 5 cm. x 2 cm. on back of right wrist. ( 7 ) IN the opinion of the Doctor, the death of Sajid Husain had taken place due to coma as result of injury to vital organ (brain ). ( 8 ) LATERON, investigation was done by the police sub-inspector Rajan Singh, who submitted charge sheet against the appellants. Learned Additional Sessions Judge framed the charges under Sections 147 and 302, I. P. C. read with Section 149, I. P. C. ( 9 ) PROSECUTION examined P. W. 1 Arshad Husain, informant of the crime and P. W. 2 Rameshwar Prasad, who carried the dead body for post-mortem examination, P. W. 3 Mohboob Husain and P. W. 4 Sabir Husain are other eye-witnesses of the occurrence. P. W. 5 Rajan Singh is investigating officer, P. W. 6 Kashi Ram is head constable, who prepared chick report, P. W. 7 Dr. G. C. Agrawal performed autopsy on the dead body of Sajid Hussain in the mortuary of Meerut, P. W. 8 Ganga Ram Nagar is another investigating officer. ( 10 ) ACCUSED denied their participation in the crime. It was alleged that Sajid Husain was killed in the night and accused have been falsely implicated in the case due to faction in the village. ( 11 ) AFTER appreciating the evidence, learned Additional Sessions Judge, convicted and sentenced the appellants to undergo life imprisonment, against which instant appeal has been preferred. ( 12 ) AS noted above also, prosecution examined three eye-witnesses. P. W. 1 Arshad Husain, P. W. 3 Mahboob Husain and P. W. 4 Sabir Husain. ( 11 ) AFTER appreciating the evidence, learned Additional Sessions Judge, convicted and sentenced the appellants to undergo life imprisonment, against which instant appeal has been preferred. ( 12 ) AS noted above also, prosecution examined three eye-witnesses. P. W. 1 Arshad Husain, P. W. 3 Mahboob Husain and P. W. 4 Sabir Husain. They are all residents of the village Jaroda, police station Kithore, district Meerut. Arshad Husain is the real brother of deceased Sajid Husain. Mahboob Husain had gone to Meerut for his own work and he came back with the deceased while coming from Court. P. W. 4 Sabir Husain reached the spot on the alarm raised. It is not denied that appellants Afzal and Masood Ahmad had filed a case in the Court of Asstt. Collector, Meerut, in which 29-5-79 was fixed and being Pradhan of the village Sajid Husain was contesting the case, relating to lease of the land against Afzal and Masood Ahmad. During day time Afzal and his brother-in-law Kalwa appellant had threatened to finish Sajid Husain as he was making pairvi in the case against them and was creating hindrance in the possession of the land. When other witness had raised objection Sajid Husain had told that the appellants were illiterate miscreants and he had not to involve himself in such hot talk. The statement of all the three eye-witnesses Arshad Husain, Mahboob Husain and Sabir Husain are consistent and their presence on the spot is natural because Arshad Husain had gone with Sajid Husain and Mahboob Husain for his own work and while going and coming back he accompanied Sajid Husain. Sabir Husain had reached the spot on alarm. Since the case was being contested against the appellants and Arshad Husain had also accompanied Sajid Husain while coming back on bicycle, his presence on the spot is natural, though another witness Mahboob Husain was not to contest the case against the appellants, but he had gone for his own work. Mahbood Husain had to purchase nozzle of engine and the purchase was to be got done by Arshad Husain witness. It was got done by them and Arshad Husain being brother of Sajid Husain had to come back with Sajid Husain. Mahbood Husain had to purchase nozzle of engine and the purchase was to be got done by Arshad Husain witness. It was got done by them and Arshad Husain being brother of Sajid Husain had to come back with Sajid Husain. Therefore, if Mahboob Husain also came back with Arshad Husain and Sajid Husain and they took their bicycles at Shahjahanpur, where they had kept, presence of Mahboob Husain and Arshad Husain on the spot is not unnatural. All the three witnesses are the residents of the same village Jaroda. They had to come back to the same village from Meerut. Therefore, if after waiting for some time, they could come back together, they thought it convenient to do so. Therefore, presence of the witnesses on the spot cannot be doubted. It was the month of May, where there is no darkness at 6. 30 P. M. Besides it, threatening was extended by two appellants in the Court. Appellants met on way armed with weapons and they chased. Witnesses Arshad Husain and Mahboob Husain were successful in making their escape good and Sajid Husain became the victim. There was sufficient light to witness as to who were the real culprits. Though the police station is about 6 Km. from the scene of occurrence, but the F. I. R. was lodged by name against the appellants within three hours after the occurrence, therefore, there is no delay in lodging the F. I. R. ( 13 ) IT has been submitted by the learned counsel for the appellants that the F. I. R. was prepared at the police station and emphasis has been given about the language of the F. I. R. We subscribe to the view of the learned Sessions Judge that there is no word in the F. I. R. from which it may be inferred that the F. I. R. was written at the police station in consultation with any police official. In the F. I. R. it is written that the dead body was lying on the spot and the F. I. R. was being lodged. From these words it cannot be inferred that any consultation was made with any police official before the F. I. R. was lodged. In the F. I. R. it is written that the dead body was lying on the spot and the F. I. R. was being lodged. From these words it cannot be inferred that any consultation was made with any police official before the F. I. R. was lodged. ( 14 ) LEARNED defence counsel has also submitted that injury No. 1 could not be caused while the victim was running away and there should be at least two firearm injuries according to the prosecution version. A perusal of the record shows that when the appellants chased, Sajid Husain was running and in the meantime fire was made on him. He fell down on the earth. Accused persons reached there and caused injuries. The statement of the witnesses is that Sajid Husain was surrounded by the accused persons, then he left the bicycle and ran towards west side. The accused fired on him. Sajid Husain fell down in a field where there was concrete and accused persons having lathis, caused injuries with lathis and Hanif fired on temporal bone from a close range, resulting into death of Sajid Husain. When Sajid Husain was surrounded by 5 persons, he thought that he could be killed. He ran and fire was made. He fell down at the place where there was concrete. It is not in the F. I. R. that fire which was caused when the victim was running away, must have hit him. The witness, who is seeing the scene of running away and being chased by the accused persons does not necessarily see that the pellets had hit the victim, who fell down on uneven land and suffered injuries. There is specific statement that Hanif had fired with the pistol when Sajid Husain fell down and in post-mortem examination the injury was found on the head. Therefore, if in post-mortem examination only one firearm injury was found, the statement of the witnesses, on this basis, cannot be disbelieved. Three accused persons are said to have been armed with lathis and there are nine injuries, which would have been caused with blunt weapon. Thus, F. I. R. statement of the witnesses, and ante-mortem injuries are consistent. ( 15 ) LEARNED counsel for the defence has submitted that there is only one firearm injury which is injury No. 1. Three accused persons are said to have been armed with lathis and there are nine injuries, which would have been caused with blunt weapon. Thus, F. I. R. statement of the witnesses, and ante-mortem injuries are consistent. ( 15 ) LEARNED counsel for the defence has submitted that there is only one firearm injury which is injury No. 1. Rest injuries are said to have been caused by lathis, which are said to be nine in number but the injury No. 6 and 8 cannot be caused by lathi because injury No. 6 is contusion 24 cm. x 11 cm. on outer back of right upper arm and injury No. 8 is contusion, which was 13 cm. x 6 cm. on back of left upper arm. Learned defence counsel has argued that injuries of such extent could not be caused by lathis. These injuries would have been caused by big stones or bricks. Learned Sessions Judge has observed that Sajid Husain was running away to save himself. His life was in danger. He ran towards sugarcane crop, existing on western side. He fell down in the nali made of bricks and it was possible that injuries of bricks also took place. A perusal of the record shows that the intention of the appellants was to commit murder of Sajid Husain because being Pradhan of the village, he was proving himself very effective in making pairvi against the appellants. Thus, he was a great hurdle on their way. Their intention being to commit murder of Sajid Husain, even if they would have used bricks they would have caused injuries on vital part of the body, rather than on right and left upper arm. Thus, he was a great hurdle on their way. Their intention being to commit murder of Sajid Husain, even if they would have used bricks they would have caused injuries on vital part of the body, rather than on right and left upper arm. Besides it, if five persons conceal their presence near the way, waiting for the victim with deadly weapons like firearms and lathis if victim had fallen down on earth, he had come under the control of the assailants, who were five in number and they had started to cause injuries with lathis, the victim, who was knowing that his death was imminent, had to save himself and if in his maximum speed, he fell down and while lying on the concrete, surface, his body turned on left or right side suffering injuries of lathis one after another and two contusions on right upper arm and left upper arm did take place, these contusions are possible from concrete or brick surface of nali where they had fallen down. One injury being caused with firearm by Hanif and other injuries being caused with lathis by Afsar, Masood Ahmad and Kalwa are proved and the presence of Afzal Ahmad is also proved by the statement of the witnesses, because he was one of the persons, who was contesting the case in respect of land and was much aggrieved from Sajid Husain, pradhan of the village. ( 16 ) IT is submitted by learned defence counsel that when a person falls down in nali he will not be seen by the other witnesses and, thus, eye-witnesses had no occasion to see that the appellants were causing injuries to Sajid Husain. But the circumstances cannot be ignored that threatening was extended by two accused persons in the Collectorate Court campus, Meerut. The appellants all of sudden came on their way from behind "peer", made challenge and chased, Arshad Husain and Mahboob ran towards one direction, Sajid Husain ran towards west side, where there was sugar cane field. In these circumstances, who were chasing and had caused injuries to Sajid Husain, resulting into his instantaneous death, was a fact well within the knowledge of the witnesses. Hence if they had stated that appellants committed murder of Sajid Husain, the statement of eye-witnesses deserves to be believed. In these circumstances, who were chasing and had caused injuries to Sajid Husain, resulting into his instantaneous death, was a fact well within the knowledge of the witnesses. Hence if they had stated that appellants committed murder of Sajid Husain, the statement of eye-witnesses deserves to be believed. ( 17 ) MUCH emphasis has been laid on the statement of P. W. 3 Mahboob Husain, who has stated that when accused were chasing Sajid Husain, they had fired and they had again loaded the firearm while chasing. If it was done, there is nothing unnatural. It is not necessary that the fire again had hit the victim, who was running to save himself. ( 18 ) P. W. 7 investigating officer Gangaram Nagar recovered bloodstained, plain earth and cartridges from the place of occurrence in the following morning on 26-5-79 because it had become night on 25-9-79. Thus, the place of occurrence is proved by the recovery memo and the statement of the witnesses. ( 19 ) LEARNED counsel for the defence has also submitted that no independent person of Jaroda reached the spot and there is no independent eye-witness. As is evident from the record, except the case in which victim Sajid Husain and accused persons had gone to the Court, there was no other litigation pending between the parties. Therefore, the witnesses could not state against the appellants unless they were really involved in it. There is no enmity from which it may be said that the witnesses are inimical to the appellants. Besides it, the whole crime was committed in some minutes outside the village abadi. Therefore, if other witness of the village did not reach the spot, it does not mean that the witnesses, who were with the victim, are telling a lie. When the parties are of the same village, no other independent witness wants to involve for fear of incurring enmity in future. If there is no other witness to support the prosecution story, consistent and natural evidence of three eye-witnesses, Arshad Husain, Mahboob Husain and Sabir Husain, cannot be disbelieved. ( 20 ) WE have considered all the points of arguments, raised by the learned defence counsel and, in our opinion, the charge is proved against the appellants. Litigation was with Afzal and Masood Ahmad, who are cousin brothers. Kalwa is brother-in-law of Afzal. ( 20 ) WE have considered all the points of arguments, raised by the learned defence counsel and, in our opinion, the charge is proved against the appellants. Litigation was with Afzal and Masood Ahmad, who are cousin brothers. Kalwa is brother-in-law of Afzal. Besides the appellants Hanif and Afsar, who are no more alive, Afzal, Masood Ahmad and Kalwa were members of the unlawful assembly with the common object to murder Sajid Husain and they even actively participated in it. ( 21 ) THEREFORE, we subscribe to the view expressed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in the impugned judgement and there is no scope of any interference with the order of conviction and sentence, awarded to Afzal, Masood Ahmad and Kalwa. ( 22 ) THE appeal of Hanif and Afsar stands abated as they are reported dead. The appeal of Afzal, Masood Ahmad and Kalwa is dismissed. They are on bail. Their bail is cancelled. They be arrested and sent to jail to serve out the sentence. ( 23 ) A copy of the judgement along with the record be sent to the Court below for compliance and to report to this Court within two months from the date of receipt of the record. Appeal dismissed. .