Judgment V.K. Bali, J.-Intervening night of 28th and 29th June, 2001 turned out to be a blackest night for a small village Railgaon located in District Kota when vast number of persons including the appellants herein, in their frenzy touching madness killed Purshottam, Ram Kumar, Kalu, Lokendra and Heera Lal. For this carnage said to have been indulged by vast number of persons, appellants and 12 others were tried for various offences culminating into capital sentence to Mohan Lal, Yuvraj, Hansraj sons of Ram Narayan, Hansraj and Radhey Shyam sons of Gopal and Modu Nath son of Dheeru Nath, vide order of conviction and sentence dated 11.03.2003 and 13.03.2003 respectively. The appellants named above have been held guilty and sentenced for various offences as mentioned below: Under Section 148 IPC-Three years RI and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, six months’ R.I.) Under Section 427 IPC-2 years’ RI and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 6 months). Under Section 342 IPC-1 year RI and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 3 months). Under Section 460 IPC-10 years’ RI and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for one year). Under Section 302 IPC-Death sentence by hanging from neck till such time they die (To be hanged by neck till death) 2. The appellants named above (Mohan Lal, Yuvraj and Hansraj sons of Ram Narayan, Hans Raj son of Gopal, Radhey Shyam son of gopal and Modunath son of Bheru Nath have challenged the order of conviction and sentence by filing Appeal bearing No. 464/2003 Mohan Lal & Ors. vs. State of Rajasthan. .3. Out of eleven others who have been held guilty and accordingly sentenced, as mentioned above, Lal Chand @ Ram Niwas son of Birdhilal, Revadi Lal son of Kishore, Ghanshyam andRadhey Shyam sons of Prahlad who have been sentenced as mentioned below have filed criminal appeal bearing No. 670/2003. .Under Section 148 IPC-Three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, six months’ R.I.) Under Section 427 IPC-2 years’ RI and fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 6 months). Under Section 342 IPC-1 year RI and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 3 months). 500/-(in default of payment of fine, six months’ R.I.) Under Section 427 IPC-2 years’ RI and fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 6 months). Under Section 342 IPC-1 year RI and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 3 months). Under Section 460 IPC-10 years’ RI and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for one year). Under Section 302/149 IPC-Life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for one year). .4. Appellants Dhanpal, Kanhaiya and Nawal sons of Ram Pratap, and Ramlal son of Ram Narain, another four out of eleven, who have been held guilty for various offences as mentioned below, have filed criminal appeal bearing No. 621/2003: .Under Section 148 IPC-Three years R.I. And fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, six months’ R.I.) Under Section 427 IPC-2 years’ RI and fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 6 months). Under Section 342 IPC-1 year RI and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI 3 months). Under Section 460 IPC-10 years’ RI and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for one year). Under Section 302/149 IPC-Life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for one year). 5. Remaining three appellants, out of the eleven, namely Babulal son of Dev Lal, Mangilal son of Baldev and Radhey Shyam son of Shankar Lal, who have been held guilty for various offences as mentioned below, have filed criminal appeal No. 520/2003: Under Section 148 IPC-Three years R.I. and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, six months’ R.I.) Under Section 427 IPC-2 years’ RI and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 6 months). Under Section 342 IPC-1 year RI and a fine of Rs. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 3 months). Under Section 460 IPC-10 years’ RI and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for one year). Under Section 302/149 IPC-Life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for one year). 6. 500/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for 3 months). Under Section 460 IPC-10 years’ RI and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for one year). Under Section 302/149 IPC-Life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2000/-(in default of payment of fine, further RI for one year). 6. By this order, we propose to decide seven criminal appeals bearing No. ??4/2003, 421/2003, 621/2003, 622/2003, 670/2003, 674/2003 and 520/03 which have been filed challenging common impugned order of conviction and sentence dated 11.03.2003 and 13.03.2003 and Death Reference No. 1/2003 pursuant to a reference for confirmation of death sentence made by the learned Trial Judge under Section 366 CrPC. 7. All the seven appeals and the death reference have been argued by Mr. A.K. Gupta who too alongwith the learned Public Prosecutor sauggests that all these matters need be disposed of by a common Judgment . 8. The chain of events leading to the death of five persons named above was unfolded by Radhey Shyam (PW. 1) brother of Purshottam deceased who in his written report dated 29.06.2001 made at 6.45 a.m. with regard to the occurrence that had taken place in the intervening night of 28th and 29th June, 2001, stated that on 28.6.2001 his elder brother Purshottam, Ram Kumar Dhakad, Kalu Lal Mali, and Lokendra Sharma, residents of Village Railgaon, Heera Lal Meghwal resident of Rampuria, Kota had come on two motor cycles with a view to plough their land at about 5 in the evening from Rampura, Kota to Railgaon. They had come to the house of his elder brother Purshottam. No sooner they came in the village, Ram Narain s/o Gaindi Lal Gurjar, his sons Mohan Lal, Yuvraj, Hansraj Gurjar, and his son-in-law Lalchand Gurjar, Dhanpal, Kanhaiya Lal, Naval son of Rampratap Gurjar, Revdi Lal Gurjar, Hemraj, Radhey Shyam and Bhojraj sons of Gopal Gujar, Ramesh Chand and Ram Singh sons of Chaturbhuj Gurjar, Ramlal s/o Ramnarayan, Babulal son of Devlal Meena, Mangilal son of Baldev Meghwal, Ghanshyam and Radhey Shyam sons of Prahlad Meghwal, Modulal Nath, Radhey Shyam son of Shankar Lal Nath, Jagdish son of Gopal Meghwal, Shambhu Dayal son of Chhitar Dhobi, Amar Lal son of Nand Lal Meena, Sita Ram son of Gopi Lal Kumhar, all residents of Railgaon and 15-20 other persons came. All of them were armed with Gandasis, Swords, Sabbal and sticks. All of them were armed with Gandasis, Swords, Sabbal and sticks. All these persons surrounded the house of his elder brother Purshottam. He was in the house alongwith children. He and his brother Purshottam had a common wall. No sooner, these people came, they scaled the house of his brother Purshottam and started throwing stones because of which, roof sheets and `Kelu’ (tiles) of the house of his brother were broken. His brother Purshottam and his four companions for saving their lives jumped the common wall of his house and came to one of the rooms of his house. At about 12 at night, these people took him, his wife Badribai and mother Panabai as also Nirmala Bai wife of Purshottam and made them sit in the thatched roof (CHHAPRA) of Prabhulal Meena. At about 12.30 at night, relatives of Ram Narain Gurjar resident of Railgaon came in the jeeps alongwith 15-20 persons in front of his house and the moment they came, they broke the door of his house with Sabbal and entered into his house. These people dragged his brother Purshottam and Ramkumar Dhakad outside. They caused injuries to them with Gandasis and swords on their head, face, hands and feet and killed. Kalu Lal Mali, Lokendra Sharma and Heeralal Meghwal were killed inside the room with Swords, Gandasis and sticks with which they were given beatings and were thus killed. Then they took both the motor cycles in the passage and burnt the same. This occurrence was witnessed by him, his elder brother Ramlal, his mother Panabai, his wife Badribai and his brothers’ wife Nirmala. Six months prior to the date of occurrence, Kishan Chand son of Ram Narayan was murdered and Ramnarayan Gurjar was suspicious that he had been killed by the five persons who have been killed. From that day onwards, Ram Narayan Gurjar, Radhey Shyam and members of the family had become inimical towards these people and were troubling them. He could not come to lodge the report due to fear at night. In the morning, he had come with his brother Ramlal to lodge the report. He further stated that five dead bodies were lying at his house. 9. First Information Report, as mentioned above, was lodged at 6.45 a.m. on 29.6.2001 and special report with regard to the incident reached the concerned Magistrate at 10.40 p.m. on 29.6.2001. 10. In the morning, he had come with his brother Ramlal to lodge the report. He further stated that five dead bodies were lying at his house. 9. First Information Report, as mentioned above, was lodged at 6.45 a.m. on 29.6.2001 and special report with regard to the incident reached the concerned Magistrate at 10.40 p.m. on 29.6.2001. 10. During the course of trial prosecution proved homicidal death of Purshottam, Lokendra, Ramkumar, Kalu and Heeralal on the basis of post mortem reports Ex.P. 30, Ex.P. 31, Ex.P. 32, Ex.P. 33 and Ex.P. 34 respectively of the persons named above who died in the occurrence. 11. Dr. Anil Kumar Choudhary, who was examined as PW. 6, stated that on 29.06.2001 board of doctors consisting of himself , Dr. K.C. Sharma and Dr. Mahesh Chaturvedi was constituted. Post mortem on the dead body of Purshottam was conducted by the board of doctors on 29.06.2001 at .1.05 p.m. Purshottam had died within 24 hours from the time of post mortem. He found following injuries on the dead body of Purshottam: 1. Incised wound, Lt. hand cutting underlined tendons, bones (I, II & III Metacarpal) completely severed and attached with teg. of skin and also cut underlined vessels. 2. Incised wound Rt. Knee cutting underlined patella opening the joint. 3. Incised wound Lt. skin of tibia with compound fracture of tibia, size 5 cm x 3 cm x 3 cm. 4. Stab wound 4 cm x 2 cm x 10 cm Lt. side of chest injury. The Lt. ventricle of heart with blood collected around heart. 5.Incised wound extending from Rt. Side of angle of Rt. Pinna damaging. The maxilla and temporal bone on underlined soft tissue and vessels. Size 8 cm x 4 cm x 6 cm. 6. Lacerated wound crushed tissue, mandible from lower lips also severed (size 5 x 4 x 5 cm). 7. Incised wound size 3 cm x 2 x 3 cm communicating to. 8. Incised wound Rt. Side of neck size 3 x 2 x 3 cm cutting all underlined vessels and soft tissues. 9. Incised wound extending from lateral angle of Rt. Eye to the Rt. Mastoid process cutting the maxilla, mastoid bone and pinna. Size 12cm x 4 cm x 5 cm 10. Incised wound perito occipital region communicating cravial cavity and brain matter coming out. 11. 9. Incised wound extending from lateral angle of Rt. Eye to the Rt. Mastoid process cutting the maxilla, mastoid bone and pinna. Size 12cm x 4 cm x 5 cm 10. Incised wound perito occipital region communicating cravial cavity and brain matter coming out. 11. Incised wound-occipital region size 4 x 3 x 6 cm communicating to cranial cavity and brain matter coming out.’’ 12. In the opinion of the doctor, all injuries sustained by Purshottam were ante mortem in nature and were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. .13. On the same day at 1.20 p.m. PW. 6 Anil Kumar Choudhary alongwith others conducted post mortem on the dead body of Lokendra who was found to be having following injuries: 1. Incised wound R. temporo-perital region, size 10 x 4 x 10 cm communicating the crania cavity lacerated menninqus and coming out brain matter. 2. Incised wound (size 25 cm x 4 cm x 3 cm) bone depth from angle of mandible to occipital protuberane. 3.Incised wound size 20 cm x 4 x 5 cm from Temporal bone to base of Rt. Neck (Rt. Supraclavicular region) cutting right pinna, underlined bones, margines and brain matter coming out from wound. 4. Incised wound-Rt. Maxilla (size 3 cm x 2cm x 2 cm) bone depth. 5. Incised wound from angle of mouth to angle of mandible, cutting Rt. Mandible communicating succal cavity (size 8 cm x 4 cm x 5 cm). 6. Incised wound, middle of nose (size 4 x 3x 3cm) cutting the underlined structure. 7. Lacerated wound-Rt. Tempero perital region (size 12 cm x 4cm x 7cm) connecting the cranil cavity cutting bone soft tissues, mininges, brain matter coming out from wound. 8. Stab wound-supra public region (2 1/ 2 cm x 2 ½ cm x 1 cm).’’ .14. Death in the opinion of the board of doctors was coma, which was result of injuries 1 to 8. .15. On the same day, board of doctors conducted post mortem on the dead body of Ram Kumar and found following five injuries on his dead body: 1. Swelling(size 10 x 15 x 5 cm) with fracture of middle of lt. Femur. 2. Incised wound (size 10 cm x 4 cm x 3 cm) Lt. Hand cutting underlined Ms. Tendon and I, II & IIIrd Metacarpal. 3. Swelling(size 10 x 15 x 5 cm) with fracture of middle of lt. Femur. 2. Incised wound (size 10 cm x 4 cm x 3 cm) Lt. Hand cutting underlined Ms. Tendon and I, II & IIIrd Metacarpal. 3. Incised wound (size 20 cm x 5 cm x 7 cm) with lacerating the maninges and brain matter coming from wound, cutting the pinna and underlined tissue and vessles. 4. Incised wound (size 10 x 3 x 4 cm) cutting Lt. Pinna and Lt. Maxilla. 5. Incised wound at left parital region size (5 x 4 x 10 cm) communicating with the cravial cavity and margines lacerated and brain matter coming out Rt. Side of injury. .16. In the opinion of doctor, death was because of coma, which was because of injuries No. 1 to 5. .17. On the same very day, the board of doctors also conducted post mortem on the dead body of Kalu and found following injuries on his dead body: 1. Stab wound-suprasternal region (size 4 x 2 x 5cm). 2. Incised wound (10 x 4 x 5 cm) from root of nose to Rt. Angle of mandible cutting the underlined structures and communicating with buccal cavity. 3. Incised wound (size 8 x 5 x 5 cm) from Rt. Frontal region to medial side of Rt. Eye and nose, fracture maxilla. 4. Incised wound size (8 cm x 4 cm x 4 cm) from Lt. To Rt. angle of mouth upto bone depth. 5. Incised wound 12 cm 2 x 3m x 4 cm from occipital protuberance to Rt. Pinna. 6. Incised wound (15 x 4 x 7 cm) from Rt. Occiparietal region communicating cranial cavity. Cutting both margines and brain matter coming out. 7. Incised wound from left frontal to occipital region size 18 cm x 5 x 8 cm) lacerating the margines and cutting bone & brain matter coming out. 8. Incised wound-lower jaw (middle) to left angle of mandible (size 10 cm x 4 cm x 8 cm) cutting masor vessels of neck. 9. Stab wound (size 3 x 2 x 6 cm) Rt. axillary region communicating thoracic cavity injuring the lungs. 10. Incised wound (size 5 cm x 3 cm x 3 cm) cutting the extensor tendons of Rt. hand. 11. Incised wound Rt. Leg (size 7 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm). 12. Incised wound Rt. 9. Stab wound (size 3 x 2 x 6 cm) Rt. axillary region communicating thoracic cavity injuring the lungs. 10. Incised wound (size 5 cm x 3 cm x 3 cm) cutting the extensor tendons of Rt. hand. 11. Incised wound Rt. Leg (size 7 cm x 1 cm x 1 cm). 12. Incised wound Rt. Forearm (middle) (size 13 x 2 x 2 cm). 18. In the opinion of the board, injuries sustained by Kalu were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Death was because of coma due to injuries No. 1 to 12. .19. On that very day, at 12.30 p.m. the board of doctors also conducted post mortem on the dead body of Heeralal and found following injuries on his dead body:- 1. Lacerated wound, lt. Parietal region 3 cm x 1 ½ cm x ½ cm. 2. Incised wound, lt. Side of neck cutting the great vessels 4 cm x 2 cm x 3 ½ cm. 3. Incised wound, Rt. Ear, # maxilla and underlined structure, bone depth size 8 cm x 4 cm x 2 cm. 4. Incised wound, Rt. Chin, bone depth, 5 x 2 cm. 5. Incised wound, Rt. Neck side, cutting large vessels size 5 cm x 2 cm x 5 cm. 6. Lacerated wound size5 cm x 2 cm x 2 cm 7. Lacerated wound Rt. Occipital region bone depth size 8 cm x 2 cm x 5 cm. 8. Lacerated wound, left forehead region, bone depth 5 cm x 2 cm x 2 cm). 9. Lacerated wound occipital parietal region (Lt.) (size 8 cm x 2 cm x 3 cm). 10. Incised wound, Rt. Knee 3 cm x 2 cm x 2 cm. 11. Incised wound, Rt. Parietal region 8 cm x 2 cm x entering the cranial cavity fracturing the underlined bone and exposing the brain matter. 120. Death in the opinion of the Board of Doctors was due to injuries No. 1 to 11. 21. It may be mentioned here that in the post mortem reports which have been proved, pertaining to all those who died, it had been mentioned that injuries sustained by them were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Whereas Dr. Anil Kumar Choudhary (PW. 21. It may be mentioned here that in the post mortem reports which have been proved, pertaining to all those who died, it had been mentioned that injuries sustained by them were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Whereas Dr. Anil Kumar Choudhary (PW. 6) while appearing in Court stated so only with regard to some of the deceased and not all but in cross-examination he denied that the injuries were not sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. That the injuries sustained by five persons named above were sufficient to cause death, however, is not in dispute. 22. Dr. Mahesh Chaturvedi who was examined as PW. 7 and who too was one of the members of the board of doctors stated that the injuries found on the dead body of Purshottam collectively were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Purshottam had sustained ante mortem injuries and his death was because of heart failure because of injuries 1 to 11. He deposed with regard to the post mortem conducted by him alongwith others who also died in the occurrence. 23. Eye witness account of the occurrence was provided by Radhey Shyam brother of the deceased who appeared as PW. 1, Ramlal (PW. 2) brother of Radhey Shyam PW. 1 and deceased Purshottam, Panabai (PW. 3) mother of Purshottam and PW. 1 and 2, Nirmala (PW. 4), Anita (PW. 5), Badribai (PW. 8), Manisha (PW. 9) and Kaushalya (PW. 10). 24. Radhey Shyam while appearing as PW. 1 reiterated what he had stated while lodging the report. He named 26 persons including all the appellants who had come and surrounded the house of Purshottam. He also stated in examination-in-chief that these people were led by the Sarpanch and on coming in front of the door of house of Purshottam they had said that they will kill them, on which Purshottam and others said that what harm they had caused to them but they said that they will be killed. He also stated that when he, his wife, his sister-in-law Nirmala and his daughter Anita, Manisha daughter of his elder brother, his mother Panabai had come to his house and bolted the door of the room. Hemraj and Modunath had gone on the roof of his house. He also stated that when he, his wife, his sister-in-law Nirmala and his daughter Anita, Manisha daughter of his elder brother, his mother Panabai had come to his house and bolted the door of the room. Hemraj and Modunath had gone on the roof of his house. Radhey Shyam, Ghanshyam, Kanhaiya, Mangilal, Mahendra, Hemraj had come on the roof of the house of Purshottam. Rest of the persons went on the roof of the house of Malis and some of them stood on the back side of the house. Some of them had also stood in front of his and Purshottam’s house. These people were throwing stones. All the five persons who died were sitting in the house, roof of which was of sheets. The accused had thrown stones from all sides and destroyed the roof . Two jeeps came from the side of Khajurna after about half an hour. In the jeeps, Ramdayal, Madan Jakhodawala, Nand Kishore, Gajanand, Sitaram, Jodhraj were sitting. There were in all 14-15 persons. They came out of the jeeps and were armed with Dharia, Gandasis, Sabbal and sticks. Ramdayal was armed with a rifle while others had sticks. Out of these people, Ramdayal said where these people had hidden themselves and that they should come out. Hemraj, Kanhaiya and Jodhraj broke open the door by Gandasi, Sabbal, Dharia and sword. Some people were standing on the roof also. They too came inside. Those who were standing outside and had surrounded the house also came inside. Those who jumped from the roof were Hemraj, Chhitarlal, Babulal and Bhojraj. Ram Kumar was dragged from inside by Yuvraj, Hansraj, Radhey Shyam, Hemraj and Kanhaiya Lal. They pounced upon him and gave him injuries with Sword, Gandasi, sticks, axe and Dhariya. Purshottam was also dragged from inside by Mangilal, Ghanshyam, Naval, Mukesh and Radheyshyam Nath. He too was given injuries by them. Nandkishore said that these two persons had died, now it was the turn of those who were inside the room. Lokendra, Heeralal and Kalulal were in the room. Chaturbhuj and Ramnarain said that these people should be cut to pieces. Those who were inside the room, were beaten there only. Revdilal, Hemraj, Modunath, Mukeshnath, Radhey Shyam Nath, Mangilal, Ghanshyam Meghwal and Rahdey Shyam Meghwal had gone inside the room. They were armed with Dhariya, sword, axe, Gandasi and sticks. Lokendra, Heeralal and Kalulal were in the room. Chaturbhuj and Ramnarain said that these people should be cut to pieces. Those who were inside the room, were beaten there only. Revdilal, Hemraj, Modunath, Mukeshnath, Radhey Shyam Nath, Mangilal, Ghanshyam Meghwal and Rahdey Shyam Meghwal had gone inside the room. They were armed with Dhariya, sword, axe, Gandasi and sticks. They started beating all the three who were inside the room and they were killed. Radhey Shyam Gurjar said that it should be checked whether they had actually died. Radhey Shyam Gurjar, Hemraj and Kanhaiya Lal checked those who were lying inside the room and said that all of them had died. Thereafter, all of them went away. Both the motor cycles of the deceased were taken by the accused Mahendra and Hemraj and the same were burnt near the temple. 25. In cross-examination, PW. 1 Radhey Shyam denied the suggestion that he and his family members had gone in the house of Prabhulal and had not witnessed the occurrence. He admitted that there was thatched placed (Chhapra) in between his and Purshottam’s house. There was a `Chhapra’ in front of the house of Prabhulal. He admitted that the accused did not beat anyone from 6 p.m. to 12 at night and that the deceased kept on sitting in his house from 6 p.m. to 12 at night. He stated that Kalulal, Heeralal and Lokendra were beaten inside the room. At that time, he was not inside the room but was standing outside the door. He admitted that when all those who died were given beatings, he was standing in front of thatched place (Chhapra) of Prabhu Lal Meena. He denied that the said Chhapra was 100 feet away from the place of occurrence and therefore, he could not see what had happened. He denied that there was complete darkness where the occurrence had taken place. He stated that an electric bulb was on at that time. He also stated that the accused had entered his room after breaking open the door from the roof and some from the roof of Purshottam’s house and some from all the four sides. He admitted that he had not got recorded in the FIR that some people had come from the roof . Ramkumar, he stated, was dragged from inside by Yuvraj, Hansraj, Radhey Shyam, Hemraj and Kanhaiya Lal. He admitted that he had not got recorded in the FIR that some people had come from the roof . Ramkumar, he stated, was dragged from inside by Yuvraj, Hansraj, Radhey Shyam, Hemraj and Kanhaiya Lal. He would, however, not remember whether this fact was got recorded by him in FIR Ex.P. 1. He thereafter, admitted that this fact was not mentioned by him in the FIR. He further stated that names of Revdilal, Modunath, Mukeshnath, Radhey Shyam Nath, Mangilal, Ghanshyam Meghwal, Radhey Shyam Meghwal and Hemraj having come inside were not mentioned in the FIR but it was mentioned that they entered with Gandasis and other arms. He admitted that Modunath had said that all children should be taken out of the house. He had also restrained others from throwing stones. He also stated that it took 15-20 minutes for those who had come in the Jeeps in giving beating and they went back in the jeeps. He denied the suggestion that but for those who had come in the Jeeps none else had indulged in beating anyone. He admitted that it was not got recorded in the FIR that some persons had jumped from the roof . It was also not mentioned in the FIR that Babulal had jumped and had come inside. He further admitted that it was not mentioned in the FIR that Kanhaiya Lal had broken open the door. It was also not mentioned in the FIR that Ramkumar was caught hold of and was dragged. He also admitted that it was not mentioned in the FIR that Purshottam was dragged out of the room. He also admitted that it was not mentioned in the FIR that Kanhaiya Lal had entered the room to check whether persons who were in the room, had died or not. 26. Ramlal, brother of Radhey Shyam (PW. 1) and brother of the deceased Purshottam, who was examined as PW. 2, while supporting the prosecution case, also stated that Sarpanch Ram Narayan with 26-27 persons, same as stated by Radhey Shyam (PW. 1) had come at the house of Purshottam and surrounded it. Mohan Lal, Yuvraj, Hansraj and Revdilal had gone to the roof of house of Purshottam. Hemraj and Modunath had gone to the roof of house of Radhey Shyam. Babu Meena and Chhitarlal had come towards his house and went on `Kavelu’. 1) had come at the house of Purshottam and surrounded it. Mohan Lal, Yuvraj, Hansraj and Revdilal had gone to the roof of house of Purshottam. Hemraj and Modunath had gone to the roof of house of Radhey Shyam. Babu Meena and Chhitarlal had come towards his house and went on `Kavelu’. They had been surrounded from all sides. Ramnarain Sarpanch and Chaturbhuj stated that all five should be finished. Ramkumar, Purshottam, Lokendra. Heeralal and Kalulal all should be finished. Meanwhile, these persons started throwing stones at the house of Purshottam. Those who threw stones were Mohan Lal, Yuvraj, Hansraj, Revdilal, Ramesh, Ramsingh and others. All the five who died, went inside and closed the door. They had gone in the house of Purshottam in a tin shed. The sheet of the house was broken by stones. All these five persons, in order to save their lives, broke the brick wall and went to the house of Radhey Shyam who was sitting in the house at that time. Radhey Shyam, his mother Panabai, Badri Bai wife of Radhey Shyam, Nirmala wife of Purshottam, Anita wife of Purshottam and two boys Kalu and Shanker, his daughter Manisha were also in the house of Radhey Shyam. Radhey Shyam bolted the door. The accused kept on sitting upto 12 at night. They were hurling abuses. Some of them were in the street whereas some of them had come on roofs from all four sides. Some time after 12 at night, jeeps of persons of Khajurna came. There were 10-15 persons in those jeeps. Ramdayal, Nadkishore, Jodhraj and Sitaram Rao were also in those jeeps. There were many other persons also whose names he did not know but would know them from their faces. No sooner they came, they told Radhey Shyam Bhopa as to where were those people hiding. They were told that these people were hiding in a cemented room. Ramdayal then said that the door should be broken and those persons should be finished after taking them out. Mohanlal, Yuvraj, Radhey Shyam and Hemraj broke the door of the house of Radhey Shyam by Sabbal and axe. First of all, Ramkumar and Purshottam were dragged outside. Ramkumar was dragged by Radhey Shyam, Hemraj, Yuvraj, Hansraj and Kanhaiya Lal. They were armed with Dhariya, Gandasi and sword. Radhey Shyam was armed with a sword. Mohanlal, Yuvraj, Radhey Shyam and Hemraj broke the door of the house of Radhey Shyam by Sabbal and axe. First of all, Ramkumar and Purshottam were dragged outside. Ramkumar was dragged by Radhey Shyam, Hemraj, Yuvraj, Hansraj and Kanhaiya Lal. They were armed with Dhariya, Gandasi and sword. Radhey Shyam was armed with a sword. Yuvraj and Hemraj were armed with a Gandasi and Hansraj was armed with a Dhariya. Thereafter, Purshottam was dragged by Mangilal Meghwal, Ghanshyam Meghwal, Naval Gujar, Radheyshyam Nath and Mukesh Nath. Purshottam was beaten and cut outside. He received injuries on his face, head and on all parts of his body. Meanwhile, Nandkishore told that these two persons had been finished and now, it should be the turn of those who were inside. Those persons who were on roof -Modulal Nath, Ramlal, Chhitarlal, Babulal Meena, Nandkishore, Ramdayal, Radhey Shyam and Bhojraj had gone inside and killed those who were in the room, by Dhariya, Gandasi, axe and sword. Lokendra, Kalu and Heeralal were finished in the room. These people received injuries on head, hand and feet and on all parts of the body. When all these five persons were finished, Modunath had enquired as to whether all of them had died, then, Radhey Shyam Gujar and Modunath checked as to whether somebody was still alive and then they said that all the five had died and now they should go. While going, Radhey Shyam and Modunath had said that anyone who would give information to the police would be finished in the same manner. After this, these people burnt the two motor cycles belonging to the deceased. These people did not harm his brother Radhey Shyam. His brother Radhey Shyam, his mother, Nirmala wife of Radhey Shyam, Badribai wife of Purshottam, three children of Radhey Shyam, three children of Purshottam and his daughter Nirmala were taken out of the Chhapar. 27. In his cross-examination, he stated that Modunath, the moment he came, had told that stones should not be thrown and the children should be taken out of the house. He admitted that it was on the saying of Modunath that wife and children of Purshottam had gone to the Chhapra of Prabhulal. When these people were taken out, stone throwing had come to an end. He admitted that it was on the saying of Modunath that wife and children of Purshottam had gone to the Chhapra of Prabhulal. When these people were taken out, stone throwing had come to an end. He admitted that 10-15 persons who had come in the Jeeps had straightaway one after the other had gone to the house of Radhey Shyam by breaking open the door. Ramkumar and Purshottam were killed outside the house whereas other three were killed in the room. He then stated that since he was standing outside he could not see that inside the room, which accused had caused injuries to the deceased with which weapon and at what place. He had seen faces of these persons when they had come out of the room after killing three persons. He denied the suggestion that the accused were not armed. However, when confronted with the statement Ex.D. 3, he admitted that it was not mentioned therein that the accused were armed with weapons but he stated that he had got recorded to the police that the accused were armed with weapons but would not know why it was not mentioned in the statement. Names of 4-5 persons who had broken open the door had been given by his estimation. He admitted that in his statement Ex.D. 3 it was mentioned that the accused as a whole had dragged and killed Purshottam and Ramkumar and it was not mentioned that individual accused as named by him, had dragged and killed them. He admitted that it had not been mentioned in his statement as to what arms the accused were having and which accused caused injury with which weapon. He admitted that for killing Purshottam, name of accused Naval had not been mentioned in his statement Ex.D. 3 but all other accused have been named by him. He admitted that he had not gone inside the room where three persons had died. He also admitted that who caused injuries to whom inside the room was not known to him as he had not seen it. He admitted that in his police statement Ex.D. 3 it was not mentioned that Radhey Shyam and Modunath had said that Ramdayal, Nankishore, Dhanraj had come from Khajurna and there was no need now to worry. He said that he had got it recorded to the police in his statement Ex.D. 3. He admitted that in his police statement Ex.D. 3 it was not mentioned that Radhey Shyam and Modunath had said that Ramdayal, Nankishore, Dhanraj had come from Khajurna and there was no need now to worry. He said that he had got it recorded to the police in his statement Ex.D. 3. He also admitted that it was not mentioned in his statement made to the police Ex.D. 3 that Radhey Shyam Gujar and Modunath had said that they were sitting in a cemented room but stated that he had told police about it. He also admitted about some variations in the names from the statement he had made for the first time and the one that he made for the second time in the Court. 28. Smt. Pana Bai, mother of PW. 1, PW. 2 and Purshottam deceased who was examined as PW. 3 also supported the prosecution case. After naming quite a few who were named by PW. 1 and PW. 2 who had come with other unnamed persons and giving further details of the occurrence, she further stated that at 12 at night, Modunath told Radhey Shyam if he was in the room, he should come out and Radhey Shyam should also take out his mother and children. They all were taken out of t