M. C. JAIN, J. Both these appeals challenge the order of conviction and sentence passed by Sri O. P. Saxena, the then Sessions Judge, Bareilly in Sessions Trial No. 303 of 1980 awarding them life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 2831 of 1980 is Pooran whereas Natthu and Chhadammi are the appellants in connected Criminal Appeal No. 2832 of 1980. 2. We have heard Sri Satish Dwivedi, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the appellants assisted by Sri Srikant and Sri Raghuraj Kishore Advocates, Sri G. S. Bisaria learned A. G. A. has been heard from the side of State in opposition. 3. The facts may be stated shortly for proper appreciation. The deceased was Janki Singh, resident of village Dhanaiti Gujarwali, Police Station Aliganj, District Bareilly. The appellant Natthu is the son of Laxman whereas the appellant Pooran is the son of Dori Lal. Laxman and Dori are real brothers. The appellant Chhadammi is son of Sita Ram, brother of Doris wife and was resident of village Rafiabad, Police Station Fatehganj (West) whereas the other two appellants resided in village Dhanaiti. The previous background was that Dori had earlier filed a case against Janki and others under Section 147/148/323 IPC which had ended in acquittal. As a result, Natthu and Pooran started nursing enmity against Janki and others. There was a field of deceased Janki in which crop of melon was sown. There was another field towards east which was lying vacant. Towards west, there was a passage whereafter there was another field lying vacant. Janki had placed a thatch in his field. 4. On 14-5-1980 at about 6 p. m. Janki, his nephew Ram Pal PW 1 and son Kalyan PW 4 were sitting towards south of the thatch. The three appellants came from the side of the village. Natthu armed with a Kanta, Pooran with a spear and Chhadammi armed with a lathi, shouting abuses made a challenge. Janki, Ram Pal and Kalyan stood up and ran towards western side. Ram Pal was ahead of all followed by Kalyan and Janki was the last. The appellants chased them, surrounded Janki and began assaulting him with their weapons. Janki fell down but the appellants continued to assault him even thereafter. Janki, Ram Pal and Kalyan stood up and ran towards western side. Ram Pal was ahead of all followed by Kalyan and Janki was the last. The appellants chased them, surrounded Janki and began assaulting him with their weapons. Janki fell down but the appellants continued to assault him even thereafter. Om Pal PW 2 and Raghunandan rushed up on hearing the alarm and on their intervention, the appellants ran away towards the northern side. Janki succumbed to his injuries. Ram Pal lodged the FIR the same day at the Police Station which was four miles away. A case was registered and the police swung into action, investigation having been taken by the Investigating Officer D. P. Tiwari P. W. 7. He reached the place of occurrence in the night itself at about 2 a. m. The light being not sufficient, the dead-body was examined on 15-5-1980 between the 7 a. m. and 8. 30 a. m. and inquest report was prepared. The other formalities were completed whereafter the dead-body was sent for post mortem through Constable Ram Pal Singh PW 5. Post-mortem over the dead-body was conducted on 16-5-1980 at 4 p. m. by Dr. B. K. Andley PW 3. The deceased was of about 50 years and about 2 days had passed since he died. The following ante- mortem injuries were found on his person: (1) Abraded contusion 5 cm. x 3 cm on the right side of head 7 cm above right ear. The underneath bone was fractured. (2) Abraded contusion 3 cm x 1 cm on the middle of head, 7 cm from Injury No. 1. (3) Incised wound 4 cm. x 1 cm. x bone deep on the left side head 6 cm above left ear. The underneath bone was fractured. (4) Lacerated wound 4 cm. x 4 cm on the left ear pinna. The labule was badly lacerated. (5) Incised wound 2 cm. x 0. 5 cm. x bone deep on the left side face 2 cm. from left eye. (6) Incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on the nasal bridge. The nasal bone was fractured. (7) Both eyes contused and bulging. (8) Incised wound 5 cm. x 5 cm. on the front of face 1-1/2 cm. above upper lip just below nose. (9) Contusion 6 cm. x 4 cm. on the right side abdomen in middle. The nasal bone was fractured. (7) Both eyes contused and bulging. (8) Incised wound 5 cm. x 5 cm. on the front of face 1-1/2 cm. above upper lip just below nose. (9) Contusion 6 cm. x 4 cm. on the right side abdomen in middle. (10) Abraded contusion in an area 8 cm. x 5 cm. on the middle of sternum on chest. (11) Scrotum and penis swollen. (12) Lacerated wound 4 cm. x 1-1/2 cm. x bone deep on the left side chin just below lower lip. The chin was fractured. (13) Lacerated wound 5 cm. x 1 cm. x bone deep on the right side chin 1/2 cm. below right lower lip. (14) Lacerated wound 5 cm. x 2 cm. x bone deep on the back of left elbow joint. (15) Contusion 8 cm. x 4 cm. on the outer side of right buttock. (16) Contusion 6 cm. x 3 cm. on the front of right knee joint. (17) Contusion 8 cm. x 3 cm. on the front of left leg just below the knee joint. (18) Contusion 10 cm. x 6 cm on the outer side of left thigh in middle. 5. On internal examination, membranes were found lacerated. The brain was liquefied. Right frontal bone was fractured. Left temporal and parietal bones were fractured. 3rd to 7th ribs were fractured on the right side and 3rd to 5th ribs were fractured on the left side. Pleura was cut. Both the lungs were congested. 200 gms of semi-digested food was found in the stomach. Both the intestine contained faecal matter and gases. The cause of death was shock and haemorrhage due to ante-mortem injuries sustained by the deceased. 6. At the trial, the prosecution in all examined seven witnesses out of whom, Ram Pal Singh PW 1, Om Pal PW 2 and Kalyan PW 4 were eye-witnesses. The rest were Doctor, Investigating Officer and other formal witnesses. 7. The appellants denied the prosecution version and pleaded false implication. According to Natthu, he remained at the house of Meva Ram from 10 a. m. till midnight in connection with the death anniversary of his father. The appellant Pooran also claimed to be with him whereas Chhadammi claimed false implication because his father had given evidence against Janki and others. To be short, all the three denied to be the authors of the crime. The appellant Pooran also claimed to be with him whereas Chhadammi claimed false implication because his father had given evidence against Janki and others. To be short, all the three denied to be the authors of the crime. One Ram Charan was examined by them as DW-1 to say that actually the incident had taken place at about 9 or 10 p. m. when he had heard the shouts of Janki. He found his dead but the assailants were not there. According to him, he also had a melon crop nearby the spot and used to be there in the night for the protection of his crop. 8. As the evidence of the prosecution commended itself to the learned trial Judge, he recorded the impugned order of conviction and sentence which is under challenge before this Court. 9. The first argument of the learned Counsel for the appellants is that the prosecution could not prove any immediate motive for the commission of this crime. The motive, we should say, is not material in a case of direct ocular evidence as is the situation here. That aside, the prosecution has put forth the previous background between the two sides. The FIR itself states there was old enmity and litigation between Natthu appellant and the informant Ram Pal Singh PW-1 and his family, so much so that a criminal case had been acquitted a year before with the result that the accused appellants nursed grudge against the deceased and his family members in search of an opportunity to commit murder. In Court also, Ram Pal Singh P. W. 1, nephew of the deceased deposed that Dori had instituted a case under Sections 147/148/323 IPC against his uncle Janki (deceased) and others who had been acquitted and that the accused appellants were inimically disposed against them. The accused appellant Natthu is son of Laxman and Pooran is the son of Dori. Dori and Laxman were real brothers and the accused appellant Chhadammi is the maternal brother of accused appellant Pooran, being son of Sita Ram. The acquittal of a criminal case causes annoyance to the complainant and not to the accused so, on analysis, it cannot be said that there was no motive on the part of the accused appellants to commit this crime. The motive aspect, as we stated, is otherwise insignificant also in the present case because of eye-witness account. 10. The acquittal of a criminal case causes annoyance to the complainant and not to the accused so, on analysis, it cannot be said that there was no motive on the part of the accused appellants to commit this crime. The motive aspect, as we stated, is otherwise insignificant also in the present case because of eye-witness account. 10. The second argument of learned Counsel for the appellants is that the FIR was ante-timed. He urged that the incident, as per the prosecution, occurred on 14-5-1980 at about 6 p. m. and the report was lodged by Ram Pal Singh P. W. 1 an eye-witness the same day at 9. 15 p. m. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants is that the incident actually took place at about 9 p. m. Learned Counsel wanted to support his argument as to the ante-timing of the FIR by certain factors which should be analysed. It was urged that 200 gms of partially digested food was found in the stomach of the deceased as per the post-mortem report and Dr. B. K. Andley P. W. 3 who conducted the autopsy stated that the deceased should have taken his meal 4-5 hours before his death. It has been pointed out that testimonial assertion of Ram Pal Singh P. W. 1 and Kalyan P. W. 4 son of the deceased was that they and the deceased had gone to the field at 9 or 10 a. m. and worked there till 6 p. m. We should point out that it is common practice amongst villagers to take meal while working on the field. They do not observe any uniformity of time in this behalf. Usually, it is between 12 Oclock noon and 2 p. m. that they take their day meal. We note that none of the above witnesses was asked about the time when the deceased Janki took his mid-day meal. There is nothing on record that he had taken his meal at the house itself before coming to the field. Usually, it is between 12 Oclock noon and 2 p. m. that they take their day meal. We note that none of the above witnesses was asked about the time when the deceased Janki took his mid-day meal. There is nothing on record that he had taken his meal at the house itself before coming to the field. There does not appear to be any improbability if he took his meal at the field around 2 p. m. Therefore, semi digested food could be there in his stomach when the occurrence took place at about 6 p. m. Obviously, the existence of semi digested food is not at all an indicator that the occurrence would have taken place at about 9 p. m. 11. The second factor urged by the learned Counsel for the appellants was that in the FIR the distance of the Police Station from the place of occurrence was recorded as 4 miles whereas it is recorded as 6 miles in the inquest report prepared by the Investigating Officer at the crime spot on 15-5-1980 at 7 a. m. , meaning thereby that the FIR was not ready till then and it came in existence later on having been ante- timed. It is found that the Investigating Officer D. P. Tiwari PW 7 was not interrogated on this aspect of the matter. He could have noted the distance in the Panchayatnama on the basis of his personal impression. 12. It was then urged that in the inquest report the weapons by which death was caused were not given in the third column in which cause of death was mentioned by a single word katal. We should say that the object of holding an inquest report is simply to make an investigation and to draw up a report of apparent cause of death describing such wounds, fractures and other marks of injury as may be found on the body of the victim. Moreover, filling up of inquest report largely depends upon the capability of the Investigating Officer. In the case at hand, numerous injuries were mentioned in the inquest report. On being interrogated the Investigating Officer D. P. Tiwari P. W. 7 denied the defence suggestion that he did not mention the weapons as the report was not ready. There does not appear to be any justification to jump to this conclusion. In the case at hand, numerous injuries were mentioned in the inquest report. On being interrogated the Investigating Officer D. P. Tiwari P. W. 7 denied the defence suggestion that he did not mention the weapons as the report was not ready. There does not appear to be any justification to jump to this conclusion. It is obvious that he did not mention the weapons because, according to his experience and capability, he did not consider it necessary. Even if it is attributed to his negligence or incompetence, it would not cast doubt on the truthfulness of the prosecution version. 13. Another factor urged by the learned Counsel for the appellants to stress ante-timing of the FIR is that the statement of Constable Badu Ram P. W. 6, the scribe of Chik and G. D. entry, shows that G. D. No. 32 regarding the registration of this case was put down by a fresh carbon paper while G. D. entries No. 31,33 and 35 were written down by an old and used carbon. We note that the witness denied that the space had been left in the G. D. for putting down Entry No. 32 and that the same was put down later or that it was the reason that the carbon copy appeared to be darker than the copies of the other G. D. entries. Constable Badu Ram P. W. 6 was not interrogated as to the reason for the carbon being darker of G. D. Entry No. 32. It goes without saying that a number of copies of G. D. entry are to be prepared in a case in which a special report has to be sent. In case Constable Badu Ram PW-6 had been interrogated on the above aspect of the matter, he could have explained that a fresh carbon paper was used for putting down general diary Entry No. 32 as a number of copies were required. The statement of Constable Badu Ram PW 6 is also to the effect that he sent wireless regarding the occurrence at that very time and sent special report on 15-5-1980 at 7 a. m. through Constable Hansraj Singh. On the basis of imagination or surmises, it cannot be pronounced that G. D. Entry No. 32 was written later on and FIR was ante-timed. 14. On the basis of imagination or surmises, it cannot be pronounced that G. D. Entry No. 32 was written later on and FIR was ante-timed. 14. The learned Counsel for the appellants then argued that Shiv Singh and Daya Ram accompanied the informant Ram Pal Singh PW-1 to the Police Station at the time of lodging the FIR as recorded in General Diary Entry No. 32. However, his statement before the Court is that Shiv Singh and Daya Ram had not reached the spot when he had left the police station and that they came later on. It has to be taken note of that Ram Pal Singh PW-1 is an illiterate village rustic who appears to have so said under some confusion that they had not accompanied him to the police station and that he had been accompanied by his father and cousin Kalyan Singh. This insignificant contradiction is not at all material because Shiv Singh and Daya Ram are not the eye-witnesses of the incident. It would not lead to the inference that the FIR was ante-timed. 15. The learned Counsel for the appellants then wanted to support the alleged ante-timing of the FIR by the factum that the dead-body reached Bareilly on 15-5-1980 at 10 p. m. as stated by Constable Ram Pal Singh PW 5 who had carried the dead-body. The post-mortem, it would be recalled, was conducted on 16-5-1980 at 4 p. m. It has been pointed out that the dead-body could not be sent on 15-5-1980 at 8. 30 a. m. and it was actually sent sometime 4-5 p. m. According to the Challan, the place of occurrence from Bareilly is about 35 Km. The statement of Constable Ram Pal Singh PW-5 is that the dead-body was brought in a bullock cart. From Dhanethi he and the other Constable came to Aliganj by bullock cart via Majhganwan. From Aliganj they came to Chaubarra and from there to Bareilly. There is pucca road between Chaubarra and Bareilly. The distance between Chaubarra and Bareilly is about 10-12 Kms. The point urged is that to explain the delay, Constable Ram Pal Singh P. W. 5 has stated that it was brought through a circuitous route. From Aliganj they came to Chaubarra and from there to Bareilly. There is pucca road between Chaubarra and Bareilly. The distance between Chaubarra and Bareilly is about 10-12 Kms. The point urged is that to explain the delay, Constable Ram Pal Singh P. W. 5 has stated that it was brought through a circuitous route. The statement of Ram Charan DW-1 has been referred to that there is a shorter route via Prithvipura - Jogi Ther - Kalektarbookganj to reach Bareilly and the distance can be covered within three hours. The point of the learned Counsel for the appellants is that the journey through longer route is shown to have been performed so as to explain the delay in reaching the dead- body at Bareilly. Constable Ram Pal Singh P. W. 5 showed his ignorance about the shorter alternative route. We are of the view that it was appropriate for him to carry the dead-body on the bullock cart through the known convenient route to avoid any unforeseen difficulty in the way. The arrival of the dead body at Bareilly on 15-5-1980 at 10 p. m. cannot, therefore, be taken to be suggestive of the late dispatch from the spot at about 4-5 p. m. on 15-5-1980 and of the ante-timing of the FIR. Considering all the factors urged by the learned Counsel for the appellants, we cannot accept the argument that the FIR was ante-timed. 16. The FIR was lodged by oral narration, which rather speaks of its genuineness and spontaneity. It is believable that immediately after the incident the informant Ram Pal Singh PW-1 rushed to the police station and lodged the FIR there. No time gap intervened for concoction and deliberation. 17. In support of the contention that the incident actually took place at about 9 p. m. on 14-4-1980, the learned Counsel for the appellants invited out attention to the evidence of Ram Charan DW-1, resident of Prithvipura. His evidence shows that towards south of the river bed Ram Ganga there is village Dhaneti and towards north is his village Prithvipura. He claimed that his Palez (crop of melon) was on the northern side of the river bed. It is not possible to accept his testimony that he reached the crime spot at about 9 p. m. on hearing the shrieks of Janki and found him dead there. The reasons may be stated. He claimed that his Palez (crop of melon) was on the northern side of the river bed. It is not possible to accept his testimony that he reached the crime spot at about 9 p. m. on hearing the shrieks of Janki and found him dead there. The reasons may be stated. On being asked, Ram Pal Singh PW-1 stated that Palez of Natthu Baretha and Dal Chand were on the northern side of the river Ram Ganga, at about 300-400 paces but he was not suggested about the existence of Palez of Ram Charan DW-1. It renders it doubtful that he had any Palez or melon crop across the Ram Ganga river on northern side. The statement of Ram Charan DW-1 is that Janki was murdered about 9-10 p. m. and on hearing the shrieks, he had gone to the crime spot. By the time he reached there, the assailants had run away. In our opinion, he had rightly been disbelieved as wholly unreliable. According to him, he went to the place of occurrence after half an hour of the alarm raised by Janki and found none there. If he had heard an alarm, he would have either rushed forward immediately or not at all. There could be no point in going there after half an hour. He did not say that he was waiting for some persons of his village to accompany him. According to him, there was none of the family of Janki at the spot. Then he could be expected to have gone to his house for informing his family members. He did nothing of the kind. He denied that he had any strained relations with Janki. Thus, there could be no reason for his not acting in natural way of going to his (deceaseds) house for informing his family members. His version is further belied by his statement that there was a Tahmad and Baniyan on the dead-body. The evidence of S. I. D. P. Tiwari PW-7 and Ex. Ka-12 show that the dead- body had blue Kurta, Dhoti having a blue line, Baniyan and underwear with a cap lying nearby. Had Ram Charan DW-1 gone to see the dead-body of Janki after the occurrence, he would have at least known the clothes actually worn by him. It was not his version that he did not recollect. Ka-12 show that the dead- body had blue Kurta, Dhoti having a blue line, Baniyan and underwear with a cap lying nearby. Had Ram Charan DW-1 gone to see the dead-body of Janki after the occurrence, he would have at least known the clothes actually worn by him. It was not his version that he did not recollect. Rather he made a definite statement about Tahmad and Baniyan being there on the dead-body of the deceased. The evidence of Kalyan PW-4 as well as Ram Charan DW 1 shows that Palez of Janki was not ready at that time. The statement of Ram Charan DW-1 is to the effect that cultivators sleep near the field only when the Palez gets ready. When the Palez was not even ready, there could be no question of the deceased sleeping there in the night. This being so, there could be no occasion, as per his own showing, for him also to be at his field (even if it is taken for the sake of argument that he had one) to keep a watch on his unripened palez or melon crop. Moreover, the recovery of cap near the dead-body of the deceased was also a pointer that he was not sleeping there in the night. Neither any cot nor any bed was found by the Investigating Officer at the spot and the same further belies the testimony of Ram Charan DW-1. There is not the slightest doubt that he came to tender negative evidence so as to lend helping hand to the accused appellants to avoid the legal consequence of the crime committed by them, if possible. 18. Learned Counsel for the appellants levelled criticism that out of the three eye-witnesses Ram Pal Singh PW-1 was the nephew of the deceased whereas Kalyan PW-4 was his son of about 12 years. He contended that there could hardly be any reason for this lad of tender age to be there with his father at the field for the whole day. We should point out that all the three eye-witnesses including these close relatives of the deceased were subjected to searching cross-examination which they withstood firmly and nothing came out to cast cloud on their testimony. There was nothing unusual if Kalyan PW-4 was there with his father on the field in the day. We should point out that all the three eye-witnesses including these close relatives of the deceased were subjected to searching cross-examination which they withstood firmly and nothing came out to cast cloud on their testimony. There was nothing unusual if Kalyan PW-4 was there with his father on the field in the day. It is not unusual for the villagers to take boys of such age to the field in the day who have nothing to do at home. Instead of idling away time and loitering hither and thither in the village, they are better taken to the fields to help the elders in minor activities connected with field work of which they are capable. Om Pal PW-2 also satisfactorily explained his presence at the spot that he was scrapping grass towards the western side of the Palez of Janki. The appellants could not show any direct enmity against him. On the other hand, the Investigating Officer D. P. Tiwari PW-7 found little scrapped grass and signs of scrapping grass at the spot in the western side of the crime spot as depicted in the site plan (wherefrom the witness Om Pal witnessed the occurrence ). Therefore, the criticism levelled against the eye-witnesses does not carry any weight. 19. Another important argument of the learned Counsel for the appellants is that Pooran accused appellant was allegedly armed with a spear, but no punctured wound was found to have been sustained by the deceased. It is clear from the FIR and the post-mortem report that though the deceased sustained four incised wounds but none of them was a punctured wound. It is also found that when questioned in his cross-examination, Ram Pal Singh PW-1 stated that he did not see whether the spear had been wielded in piercing way, but there is definite statement of Om Pal PW 2 that the spear had not been used piercingly. If an assailant is armed with a weapon, used in a particular way, then ordinarily it would be put to use in its natural way. There is no point in being armed with a particular weapon which is not put to its natural use. The absence of punctured wound on the dead-body is a circumstance creating doubt as to the participation of accused appellant Pooran and the benefit of doubt should be afforded to him. There is no point in being armed with a particular weapon which is not put to its natural use. The absence of punctured wound on the dead-body is a circumstance creating doubt as to the participation of accused appellant Pooran and the benefit of doubt should be afforded to him. This argument of learned Counsel for the appellants is, therefore, acceptable and is accordingly accepted. 20. The learned Counsel for the appellants lastly argued that the offence does not travel beyond Part II of Section 304 IPC. It is not possible to agree to this submission. Without any justification whatsoever, unarmed Janki was mercilessly assaulted by sharp edged weapon and lathi (the appellants Natthu used Kanta and Chhadammi wielded lathi ). As many as four incised wounds were inflicted on the victim and lathi blows were repeatedly rained on him on different parts of his body causing several injuries of blunt object. The assailants had come with preparation sharing common intention of one another. The offence to be reduced as culpable homicide not amounting to murder has to be covered by one or the other exceptions enumerated in Section 300 IPC, which is not the case here. Rather the truth of the matter is that several injuries of sharp edged weapon and of blunt object were mercilessly inflicted on the deceased wherefor no justification can be pleaded. It clearly follows that the assailants inflicted such injuries on the person of the deceased with the intention of causing death. Therefore, the offence made out is clearly that of murder. 21. We finally order as under : Criminal Appeal No. 2831 of 1980 filed by Pooran is allowed. The order of conviction and sentence passed against him by the Court below is set aside. He is acquitted. He is already on bail. Connected Criminal Appeal No. 2832 of 1980 is hereby dismissed. The order of conviction and sentence passed against the appellants Natthu and Chhadammi under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC is maintained. Each of them shall undergo life imprisonment for the said offence as awarded by the learned trial Judge. They are on bail. They shall be arrested and lodged in Jail to serve out the sentence passed. A certified copy of this order along with the record of the case be sent to the Court below for needful compliance under intimation to this Court within two months. They are on bail. They shall be arrested and lodged in Jail to serve out the sentence passed. A certified copy of this order along with the record of the case be sent to the Court below for needful compliance under intimation to this Court within two months. Decided allowed. .