Judgment MEHTAB S. GILL, J. 1. We will be deciding Criminal Appeal No.918-DB of 2003 and criminal Revision No.436 of 2004, as they arise out of a common judgment/order. 2. This is an appeal against the judgment dated 17.10.2003 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jind whereby he convicted the appellants under various Sections of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment on various counts. During the course of trial, Ramphal son of Surat Singh died. Appeal against him has thus abated. 3. The case of the prosecution is unfolded by statement Ex. PA of randhir son of Malde given to Daya Nand ASI on 21.4.1997 at 1.00 P. M. in civil Hospital, Jind. Randhir Singh has stated that he is a cultivator by profession. There are 105 killas of land in the name of Baba Gajrajgir in village Pokhri Kheri. Litigation between Baba Krishangir and Baba Joragir qua this land went up till the Supreme Court. Matter was decided in favour of Baba Krishangir. Land is in possession of Baba Krishangir. Men of joragir had in the month of August attacked Baba Krishangir and fired at him in the Courts at Jind. Joragir had a grudge and wanted to take possession of this land. Complainants are the helpers of Baba Krishangir. On 21.4.1997 Mahant Narmadagir, Tirthgir and Nimbupuri were sitting in the Dera. Complainant along with Vedpal, Ramesh, Raj Kumar, Phool singh and Ajit, all residents of Pokhri Kheri were also sitting in the Dera with them. At 7 A. M. while they were sitting in the Dera of Krishangir, rajbir armed with a gandasa, Rajesh with an unlicensed pistol, Mukesh having a brick in his hand, Ram Mehar alias Babru having a gandasa in his hand, Shri Krishan having a brick in his hand, Suresh having an iron rod in his hand, Dharambir son of Maha Singh having a lathi in his hand, dharambir son of Rajmal having an unlicensed pistol in his hand, Prem having an unlicensed pistol in his hand, Teka having a lathi in his hand, hoshiara having a lathi in his hand, Jage having a lathi in his hand, ramphal having a gandasa in his hand, Ramesh having a lathi in his hand, lachhman having a gun in his hand, Chander Bhan empty handed, wives of rajmal, Hoshiara, Jage and Rajbir and Ramrati daughter of Duni and some other people came there. The ladies were having brick-bats in their hands. Chander Bhan gave a lalkara to teach us a lesson for not allowing them to enter the land. Krishan son of Giani Ram, who was standing on the wall of the house of Hukam Singh, who was in the party of the complainant, tried to intervene and asked the Gosain party as to why they attacking them. Thereafter Dharambir fired at Krishan. It hit Krishan on his mouth. Prem fired from his pistol at Vedpal, which hit him on his right shoulder, Jage gave a lathi blow on the head of Rameshs brother. Teka gave lathi blows on his right arm, Ramesh (appellant) gave iron rod blows on the left arm, suresh gave lathi blows on the left hand, Ram Mehar dealt lathi on the head of Raj Kumar, Dharambir son of Maha Singh gave two lathi blows on the left hand of the complainant, Rajbir gave a gandasa blow on the back of the shoulder of Phool Singh from the sharp side, Ramphal gave a gandasa blow on the elbow of the right arm from the blade side, Hoshiara gave lathi blows on the right hip of the complainant. Mukesh hurled brick bats on the right thigh of the complainant. Rajesh fired a shot at the complainant from his pistol which hit him on his left hand. During the fight, Darbara son of chhotu Ram and Rajpal son of Nafe Singh also came to the spot and witnessed the occurrence. All the assailants then ran away. Bhim Singh son of Nafe Singh took the injured to Civil Hospital, Jind in a tractor. Krishan succumbed to the fire shot injury on the way. Appellants wanted to enter the Dera with mala fide intention to take possession. On the basis of this statement, FIR Ex. PY was recorded on 21.4.1997 at 1.30 P. M. Special report reached the A. C. J. M, Jind on the same day at 4 P. M. Prosecution to prove its case brought into the witness box randhir as PW1, Ajit as PW2, Vedpal as PW3, Rajpal as PW4, dr. M. L. Kochar as PW5, Dr. V. K. Satija as PW6, Dr. M. L. Kochar as PW5, Dr. V. K. Satija as PW6, Dr. Suraj Kamboj as PW7, hc Om Singh as PW8, HC Rajbir Singh as PW9, Veer Bhan as PW10, C. Satish Kumar as PW11, Naresh Kumar as PW12, ASI Dharambir Singh as pw13, C. Balwant Singh as PW14, ASI Dhanpat Singh as PW15, C. Dewan singh as PW16, Inspector Chander Bhan as PW17, Retired ASI Prem Dass as PW18, Tirath Giri as PW18, Daya Nand SI as PW19 and Umed Singh ahlmad as PW20. 4. Learned counsel for appellants No.1 to 8, 10 and 12 has argued that there is an unexplained delay in the lodging of the FIR, which is fatal to the prosecution case. Occurrence had taken place at 7 A. M. on 21.4.1997. The injured had reached the Civil Hospital, Jind on the same day at 8.25 a. M. Ved Pal PW3 was examined by Dr. V. K. Satija PW6 at 8.30 A. M. PW ramesh was examined at 9.20 A. M. Randhir PW1 was examined at 9.30 a. M. DW Raj Kumar was examined at 10 A. M. PW Phool Singh was examined at 10.10 A. M. Ajit PW2 was examined at 10.20 A. M. Ruqqa ex. PR was sent by Dr. V. K. Satija PW6 to the SHO, Police Station City Jind regarding the injuries on the persons of Randhir PW1, Ajit PW2, Ved Pal pw3, Ramesh and Phool Singh Pws. Ruqqa Ex. PS was sent by dr. V. K. Satija PW6 to the SHO Police Station City Jind regarding Krishan being brought to the hospital dead. Statement Ex. PA of Randhir PW1 was recorded at 1 P. M. and the formal FIR Ex. PY came into existence on 21.4.1997 at 1.30 P. M. Special report reached the ACJM, Jind on the same day at 4 P. M. ASI Daya Nand PW19 has stated that on receiving the ruqqa at 8.50 A. M. on 21.4.1997 he left for the hospital. There were a number of injured eye witnesses whose statements could be recorded, but deliberately asi Daya Nand PW19 instead of recording the statements of the witnesses started consulting the complainant party as to who was to be falsely implicated. Randhir PW1 has stated that there was previous enmity between the complainant party and appellant Chander Bhan. He has also admitted, that the wife of appellant Chander Bhan fought the panchayat elections. Randhir PW1 has stated that there was previous enmity between the complainant party and appellant Chander Bhan. He has also admitted, that the wife of appellant Chander Bhan fought the panchayat elections. The eye witness account cannot be believed, as the eye witnesses have stated that they saw all the appellants coming from the house of Joragir after due consultation and deliberations, this cannot be believed as the house of Joragir is situated as per the site plan at a place where it cannot be seen from where the complainant party was sitting. Appellants did not have the common object, nor did they, after consultation and deliberation come to commit the murder of Krishan. If they had any common object, then it would have been to eliminate Mahant Krishangir. Appellants if at all are liable for their individual acts and not any act done with common intention or with common object in mind. The medical evidence does not corroborate the ocular account. Randhir PW1, Ajit PW2 and Ved Pal PW3 have allegedly received fire arm injuries, but as per Dr. V. K. Satija PW6, these witnesses were not injured with fire arms. Learned counsels for the other appellants have adopted the arguments put forward by Shri Raghbir Chaudhary and Shri Gaurav mohunta, Advocates. 5. Learned counsel for the State has argued that there is no delay in the lodging of the FIR. Occurrence had taken place at 7/7.30 A. M. on 21.4.1997. The injured reached the hospital at 8.30 A. M. It was after the examination of the injured that the statement Ex. PA of Randhir PW1 was recorded at 1 P. M. by Daya Nand ASI PW19. Special report reached the acjm, Jind on the same day at 4 P. M. Delay if any has been adequately explained. There were a number of persons, who were injured. Appellants had the common object to eliminate Baba Krishangir, who had won the case of 105 killas of land up to the HON BLE Supreme Court. Appellants came armed with deadly weapons and with the common object to inflict injuries and to eliminate Baba Krishangir. Unfortunately deceased Krishan intervened, asking them as to why they were attacking them. As the appellants had already made up their mind to inflict injuries on the complainant party, appellant Dharambir son of Rajmal fired from his pistol at Krishan, who unfortunately died. Unfortunately deceased Krishan intervened, asking them as to why they were attacking them. As the appellants had already made up their mind to inflict injuries on the complainant party, appellant Dharambir son of Rajmal fired from his pistol at Krishan, who unfortunately died. Other appellants used their respective weapons and inflicted injuries on the complainant party. An FIR Ex. P10 dated 30.8.1996 was registered earlier, when an attempt was made to eliminate Baba Krishangir. All the appellants were a member of an unlawful assembly and all had to bear the consequences of their assembling together and forming an unlawful assembly with the common object of murdering Baba Krishangir and injuring his supporters. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance. 6. This case is based on the testimony of three injured eye witnesses i. e. complainant Randhir PW1, Ajit PW2 and Vedpal PW3. The fourth eye witness though not injured is Rajpal PW4. Occurrence had taken place on 21.4.1997 at 7 A. M. in the area of village Pokhri Kheri. Statement ex. PA of Randhir PW1 was recorded on the same day by ASI Daya Nand pw19 at 1 P. M. in the Civil Hospital, Jind. FIR Ex. PY was recorded at police Station Sadar Jind on the same day at 1.30 P. M. and the special report reached the safe hands of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, jind on 21.4.1997 at 4 P. M. From the time of occurrence i. e.7 A. M. and the special report reaching the A. C. J. M. at 4 P. M. , there is a gap of only nine hours. It has been adequately explained by the Investigating Officer ASI daya Nand PW19 as to what was being done during this period. We are of the considered opinion that there is no delay in the lodging of FIR Ex. PY. Randhir PW1, Ajit PW2, Vedpal PW3 and Rajpal PW4 in their testimony before the Court have stated clearly and categorically that a civil dispute of 105 acres of agricultural land of Dera Baba Gajrajgir was going on between Baba Krishangir and Baba Joragir. Civil litigation had gone up to the HON BLE Supreme Court. The case was finally decided in favour of baba Krishangir. Baba Krishangir was in possession of the entire land of the Dera from the very beginning. Civil litigation had gone up to the HON BLE Supreme Court. The case was finally decided in favour of baba Krishangir. Baba Krishangir was in possession of the entire land of the Dera from the very beginning. On 21.4.1997 Baba Nimbupuri, Baba narmadagir and Tirthgir, complainant Randhir PW1, Ajit PW2, Vedpal pw3, Ramesh, Raj Kumar and Phool Singh were also sitting at the Dera. At about 7 A. M. about 30 to 35 persons came to the Dera from the house of baba Joragir to take forcible possession of the Dera and its land. They were appellants Hoshiara, Rajmal, Rajesh, Mukesh, Rajbir, Jage, Ramphal, lachhman, Prem, Teka, Krishan, Ramesh, Suresh, Dharambir son of rajmal, Dharambir son of Maha Singh, Smt. Angoori, Smt. Shakuntla, Smt. Birmati, Smt. Chander, Smt. Dharam Kaur and Smt. Ramrati. Appellants were armed with pistols, iron rods and lathis. Chander Bhan raised a lalkara that they should be taught a lesson. Deceased Krishan reached the spot on hearing the noise. He asked the appellants as to why they were creating nuisance. Thereupon Dharambir son of Rajmal fired a shot from his pistol at Krishan. The pellets hit the face and shoulder of Krishan. Krishan fell down. Appellant Prem fired from his pistol which hit Vedpal PW3 on his right shoulder. Jage inflicted lathi blow on the head of Ramesh. Appellant teka inflicted lathi blows on the right arm of Ramesh. Appellant Ramesh inflicted iron rod on the left arm of Ramesh. Appellant Ram Mehar inflicted a gandasa blow from its reverse side on the head of PW Raj kumar. Appellant Dharambir son of Maha Singh inflicted two lathi blows on both arms of Raj Kumar. Appellant Rajbir inflicted a gandasa blow from its reverse side on the back portion of the left shoulder of Phool Singh ramphal (since dead) inflicted gandasa blow from its sharp side on the right elbow of Phool Singh PW. Appellant Hoshiara inflicted lathi blow on the right side hip of Phool Singh. Appellant Lachhman fired a shot from his gun which hit on the right hand fingers of Ajit PW2. Appellant Rajesh fired a shot from his pistol which hit him on the reverse side of left palm of complainant Randhir PW1. Darbara PW and Rajpal PW4, who had witnesses the occurrence, saved them and reached the spot. Appellant Lachhman fired a shot from his gun which hit on the right hand fingers of Ajit PW2. Appellant Rajesh fired a shot from his pistol which hit him on the reverse side of left palm of complainant Randhir PW1. Darbara PW and Rajpal PW4, who had witnesses the occurrence, saved them and reached the spot. Bhim son of nafe arranged for a tractor trolley and took all the injured including deceased Krishan to the Civil Hospital, Jind. The medical evidence as examined in the MLRs recorded by Dr. V. K. Satija PW6 and Dr. Suraj kamboj PW7 and by the Post Mortem Report Ex. PG as prepared by dr. M. L. Kochar PW5 corroborates the ocular account. The injured eye witnesses have not faltered in their testimony before the Court and have given a graphic account of spelt the injuries inflicted on themselves and on the other witnesses. They have corroborated each other inter se, qua weapons of offence, injuries inflicted and the role played by the appellants. 7. There is no discrepancy in the statement of complainant Randhir PW1 and what he has stated in the FI R Ex. PY. In fact the FIR finds corroboration from the statement of Randhir PW1. Raj Kumar DW1 produced by the defence has admitted in his testimony before the Court that the occurrence had taken place, but he has changed the place of occurrence from that of Dera of Krishangir to the place outside the Dera of Giri Raj Gir. He had also received injuries in the occurrence. He has stated that about 200/250 persons had come at about 7/7.30 A. M. on 21.4.1997. There was exchange of fire shots between both the parties. He has admitted the presence of complainant Randhir PW1, Ajit pw2, Vedpal PW3, Ramesh and Phool Singh. He has stated that all of them had received injuries during this fight. He has further admitted that Krishan succumbed to his injuries. All the injured witnesses were hospitalized in the civil Hospital, Jind at 8 A. M. He has admitted that a civil dispute between the parties was going on and it had finally been decided by the HON BLE supreme Court. He has further admitted that complainant Randhir PW1 recorded his statement Ex. PA at 1 P. M. on 21.4.1997 and was admitted in the hospital at 8.30 A. M. on 21.4.1997. He has further admitted that complainant Randhir PW1 recorded his statement Ex. PA at 1 P. M. on 21.4.1997 and was admitted in the hospital at 8.30 A. M. on 21.4.1997. Raj Kumar DW has tried to help the appellant party but in the process has admitted that the appellants were the aggressors. He has stated that gun shots were fired between both the parties. It is strange that none from the appellant side was injured, though a mob of 200/250 persons attacked them. 8. Appellants went towards the house of Baba Krishangir firstly assembling in the house of Baba Joragir. They were armed with pistols, guns, lathis, iron rods, gandasas and brick-bats. Common object of this unlawful assembly was to eliminate Baba Krishangir, who luckily on the day was not in the Dera. Deceased Krishan was standing on a partially fallen wall on a nearby house. He asked the appellants as to why they were causing injuries to them. It is thereafter that appellant Dharambir son of rajmal fired at him. The pellets hit his face and shoulders. In the occurrence, eight persons were injured from the complainant party. Learned counsel for the appellants have argued that a free fight had taken place in the street and thus the appellants should be liable for their own acts. This argument does not cut much ice. If a free fight had taken place, there would have been some injuries on the appellants party also, but we do not find any medico legal report showing even a scratch on the person of any of the appellants. Age of appellant Teka son of Lalji is 90 years. He had been shown to be armed with lathi and has been shown to have given a lathi blow on the right arm of Ramesh. In the MLR of Ramesh prepared by dr. V. K. Satija PW6, there is no injury of a lathi on his right arm. No role has been attributed to Lachhman son of Jagan Nath. He has not been named in the FIR. Though the author of the FIR Randhir PW1 has named the other appellants, but Lachhman son of Jagan Nath has not been named, nor has he been attributed any role. It is in the statement of Randhir PW1 in Court that he has added the name of Lachhman son of Jagan Nath being one of the assailants. Though the author of the FIR Randhir PW1 has named the other appellants, but Lachhman son of Jagan Nath has not been named, nor has he been attributed any role. It is in the statement of Randhir PW1 in Court that he has added the name of Lachhman son of Jagan Nath being one of the assailants. Appellant Chander Bhan was not carrying any weapon. He has been attributed a lalkara. Randhir PW1 in his testimony before the Court has stated that appellant Chander Bhan remained Sarpanch of village Pokhri kheri some 20 years back. For one tenure, his wife was also Sarpanch of the village. Appellant Chander Bhan had also remained a member panchayat. He has further admitted that Maha Singh is his cousin. Maha singh contested the elections of Sarpanch and it was in that election that wife of Chander Bhan, Smt. Kitabo Devi won the election from his cousin maha Singh. Though an injury has been attributed to Ram Phal son of Surat singh, but it is not corroborated by the medical evidence. It seems Teka son of Laji, Lachhman son of Jagan Nath, Chander Bhan son of Risala and ramphal son of Surat Singh have been falsely roped in. We give them the benefit of doubt. Appellants Teka son of Lalji, Lachhman son of Jagan nath, Chander Bhan son of Risala and Ramphal son of Surat Singh are acquitted of all the charges framed against them. 9. With the above observations, appeal No.918-DB of 2003 of rajesh son of Hoshiara, Dharambir son of Raj Mal, Hoshiara son of Duni, jage Ram son of Duli, Ramesh son of Ran Singh, Dharamvir son of Maha singh, Ram Mehar alias Babru son of Dhan Singh, Rajbir son of Hoshiara and Prem Singh son of Nagar is dismissed. Appeal of Teka son of Lalji, lachhman son of Jagan Nath, Chander Bhan son of Risala and Ramphal son of Surat Singh is allowed. Criminal Revision No.436 of 2004 is dismissed.