JUDGMENT P.G. Agarwal, J. 1. Heard Mr. B.M. Choudhury, learned Counsel for the appellants and the learned PP. 2. In Sessions Case No. 6(S)/93, the ten accused appellants before us were convicted under Sections 148 and 304, Part-I, IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000 each, in default, further R.I. for three months for the offence under Section 148 and imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 each, in default, imprisonment for three months under Section 304(1) IPC. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 3. On 5.4.1990 a police party consisting of constable Mahesh Saharia (PW-9), constable Biren Das (since deceased) led by S.I. Badan Chandra Dutta went to Goroimari Pathar in connection with investigation of a Dhekiajuli P.S. Case No. 40/90. The police party found that two groups of people armed with weapons were quarrelling whereupon the S.I. Badan Ch. Dutta asked the parties to restrain themselves. One of this group was led by Pagal Sardar and the said group had caused injuries to persons of the other group. However, the accused persons under leadership of Pagal Sardar first assaulted S.I. Dutta (P.W. 10) and then the other constable (PW-9) and the deceased. Seeing the assault, Kanai Mandal (PW-1) reported the matter at the Police Outpost whereupon the police came and the injured persons were taken to the hospital where constable Biren Das succumbed to his injuries. 4. During trial, prosecution examined 13 (thirteen) witnesses whereas the defence declined to adduce any evidence. So far the incident of assault leading to the death of the deceased constable Biren Das is concerned, there is oral as well as medical evidence. 5. P.W. 5 Dr. S. Kalita held autopsy over the dead body and found as follows: External Appearance: A male dead body of a stout subject. Rigor Mortis present. Hairs are mixed together with blood (blood clots). Wounds : Big haematoma over the front of the scalp. Six lacerated wounds in central portion of the scalp with fractures of the parietal bone. Measurements varies from 1/2" x 1/2” to 6" x 2" x Bone deep. Multiple fracture of both parietal bone as already stated. Thorax : Healthy. Abdomen: Blood stained fluid present on the nostrils and mouth. Cranium And Spinal Canal: Membrane - Ruptures at the site of fracture, with sub-dural haematoma. Measurements varies from 1/2" x 1/2” to 6" x 2" x Bone deep. Multiple fracture of both parietal bone as already stated. Thorax : Healthy. Abdomen: Blood stained fluid present on the nostrils and mouth. Cranium And Spinal Canal: Membrane - Ruptures at the site of fracture, with sub-dural haematoma. Brain - Brain substance is lacerated. Both the cerebral hemisphere with oeduma full of blood. All the other injuries were ante-mortem in nature. OPINION; Death was due to haemorrhage and shock and cerebral coma as a result of injuries sustained by the deceased. Except a single question there is no cross of this witness. In this case, we find that besides the deceased three other witnesses also sustained injuries in the above incident, namely, Kanai Biswas (PW-3), Mahesh Saharia (PW-9) and Biren Das (PW-10). Although PW-2 Sagar Sardar claimed to have sustained injury the Doctor did not find any injury on his person. 6. Dr. Monohar Kalita (PW-8) examined the above injured persons and found as follows : Sri Badan Dutta Wounds : 1. Lacerated injury left side of the face extending from lower eye-lid lateral to the nose to 1/2" above and angle of the mouth. Size - 2" x skin deep. Margins ragged. Duration fresh. Left eye congested. Caused by blunt weapon. 2. Lacerated injury over the fore-head just mid of the two eye-brows horizontally placed. Size - 1" x 1/4" x 1/4". Margins ragged. Duration fresh. Caused by blunt object. 3. Lacerated injury back of the scalp. Left side extending from parietal region to occipital region. Longitudinally placed. Margin ragged. Size - 2" x 1/4" x skin deep. Duration fresh. Caused by blunt object. 4. Lacerated injury back of the scalp. Right side extending from parietal region occipital region. Longitudinally placed. Margin ragged. Size-2"x 1/4" x skin deep. Duration fresh. Caused by blunt weapon. Sri Mahesh Saharia Wounds: 1. Lacerated injury over the right parietal region just 1" lateral from the mid-region. Size - 3" x 1/4" x skin deep. Longitudinal direction. Margins ragged. Duration fresh. Caused by blunt object. 2. Swelling right wrist joint. 3. Swelling left wrist-joint. Sri Kanu Mohan Biswas Wounds : 1. Lacerated injury over the fore-head. Size - 1" x 1/5" x skin deep. Margins ragged. Duration fresh. Caused by blunt object. Sri Sagar Chandra Sardar Wounds : 1. No external injury seen. Longitudinal direction. Margins ragged. Duration fresh. Caused by blunt object. 2. Swelling right wrist joint. 3. Swelling left wrist-joint. Sri Kanu Mohan Biswas Wounds : 1. Lacerated injury over the fore-head. Size - 1" x 1/5" x skin deep. Margins ragged. Duration fresh. Caused by blunt object. Sri Sagar Chandra Sardar Wounds : 1. No external injury seen. Coming to the evidence of eye witness we find that incident took place when police tried to prevent a clash between two groups, one group consisting of the accused persons and the other led by Pagal Sardar. The accused persons did not like the intervention of police and as such they assaulted them as a result of which three police personnel sustained 5 injuries and one of them succumbed to the said injuries. The eye witnesses have given a detailed version of the incident and the accused have been named by the witnesses. The seizure list (Ext. 1) lends support to the prosecution version of the story. 7. The learned Counsel for the appellant has submitted that so far the deceased is concerned, it was accused appellant Khagen who had assaulted him and this is not a case of common object. From the post mortem report and the medical evidence we find that the injured sustained as many as six injuries on his head. Likewise, PW-9 and PW-10 also sustained a number of injuries on their persons. When the group clash was going on the accused persons would not have common object to assault the police officials but on arrival of the police officer the leader of the group initiated the assault on the S.I. police and thereafter the other members followed and assaulted all the three police personnel. 8. It is well settled that the common object may develop at the moment. The basic requirements of common object have been explained by the Apex Court in the case of Gangadhar Behera v. State of Orissa 2003 CriLJ 41. The Apex Court held - The crucial question to determine is whether the assembly consisted of five or more persons and whether the said persons entertained one or more of the common objects, as specified in Section 141. The Apex Court held - The crucial question to determine is whether the assembly consisted of five or more persons and whether the said persons entertained one or more of the common objects, as specified in Section 141. It cannot be laid down as a general proposition of law that unless an overt act is proved against a person, who is alleged to be a member of an unlawful assembly, it cannot be said that he is a member of an assembly. The only thing required is that he should have understood that the assembly was unlawful and was likely to commit any of the acts which fall within the purview of Section 141. The word "object" means the purpose or design and, in Order to make it "common", it must be shared by all. In other words, the object should be common to the persons, who compose the assembly, that is to say, they should all be aware of it and concur in it. A common object may be formed by express agreement after mutual, consultation, but that is by no means necessary. It may be formed at any stage by all or a few members of the assembly and the other members may just join and adopt it. Once formed, it need not continue to be the same. It may be modified or altered or abandoned at any stage. So far the submissions that all the accused persons did not participate in the assault is concerned we may refer to the following observations of the Apex Court in the case of Masalti v. State of Uttar Pradesh [1964] 8 SCR 133 : Where a crowd of assailants who are members of an unlawful assembly proceeds to commit an offence of murder in pursuance of the common object of the unlawful assembly, it is often not possible for witnesses to describe accurately the part played by each one of the assailants. Besides, if a large crowd of persons armed with weapons assaults the intended victims, it may not be necessary that all of them have to take part in the actual assault. Besides, if a large crowd of persons armed with weapons assaults the intended victims, it may not be necessary that all of them have to take part in the actual assault. In the case of Lalji v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1989 CriLJ 850 it was held that mere presence in unlawful assembly may fasten vicariously criminal liability under Section 149which was further explained in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh v. Dan Singh 1997 CriLJ 1150 observing that it is not necessary for the prosecution to prove which of the members of the unlawful assembly did which or what act. 9. In the present case, we find the common object of the assembly was the assault of the police officer and drive them out so that the accused persons can scuttle the other group without the intervention of the police. All the accused appellants before us were the members of the unlawful assembly and they continued to remain the members of the said assembly and in the process assaulted three police officers and two other persons. We, therefore, hold that all the accused persons are guilty under Section 149 IPC. 10. In the result, we find no merit in this appeal and the appeal is accordingly dismissed. The accused persons are on bail. They are directed to surrender before the Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur. 11. Send down the records. 12. The Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur shall take the accused persons into custody forthwith to serve out the sentence. Appeal dismissed