JUDGMENT : B.P. Ray, J. - This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment and order of conviction dated 23.12.1993 passed by Learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bolangir in S.C. Case No. 59/21 of 1993 convicting all the Appellants u/s 302, Indian Penal Code and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life, further sentencing to each of them to undergo R.I. for a period of six months under each count u/s s. 148 & 323, Indian Penal Code and S.I. for 10 days u/s 341, Indian Penal Code directing that all the sentences shall run concurrently. The Appellants in this appeal challenge the aforesaid conviction and the sentences passed by the Court below. 2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 8.1.1993 at about 2.30 P.M. while the informant Kartika Behera was coming to the village danda after taking his meals, he saw that the accused persons being armed with Lathies, tangia, merraha and tabli are chasing his maternal uncle, Bilam Budek to assault. When he rushed to them to come to his rescue, the accused Deba Mahar gave a Merrha blow on his back. While he fell down on the ground on receipt of the said blow, other accused persons also assaulted him. He raised hue and cry and on hearing so, his father Abhi Behera and brothers Sartika and Biranchi ran to the place of occurrence and as soon as they arrived at the place, the accused persons also assaulted them. Accused Bhuban gave a Tabli bow to the back of Biranchi as a result of which he sustained injury and fell down. Thereafter, the accused persons hurriedly ran away. The neighbours who assembled there shifted the injured to Chudapali hospital by a bullock cart and thereafter he was shifted to Bolangir hospital. While coming to Bolangir on the way at Sadar Police Station the informant gave an oral report to P.W. 11 - OIC of Sadar Police Station, who reduced the same into writing. P.W. 1 informant subscribed his signature to the FIR (Ext. 1) at 4.40 P.M. on the same day. The OIC (P.W. 11) registered the complaint as Sadar P.S. Crime No. 8/93 under Sections 147/148/241/294/326/325/323/302 and 149 of Indian Penal Code against the accused persons. Then he examined the informant and his brother Sartika and father Abhi and sent the injured to the hospital for treatment where Biranchi breathed his last. 1) at 4.40 P.M. on the same day. The OIC (P.W. 11) registered the complaint as Sadar P.S. Crime No. 8/93 under Sections 147/148/241/294/326/325/323/302 and 149 of Indian Penal Code against the accused persons. Then he examined the informant and his brother Sartika and father Abhi and sent the injured to the hospital for treatment where Biranchi breathed his last. On getting this information the OIC sent a constable to guard the dead body and he himself came to hospital and examined some witnesses and then proceeded to the place of occurrence. He visited the spot prepared rough sketch, examined some witnesses and arrested the accused persons. During investigation he seized the Tabli, axe, lathi in presence of witnesses. He conducted inquest on the dead body of deceased on 9.1.1993 at 7.00 a.m. in presence of the witnesses and prepared inquest report. and thereafter he sent the dead body with requisition for conducting autopsy. On the same day at 11.45 a.m. the wearing apparels of the deceased were seized and on disclosure statement of accused Tanka, a tabli was recovered and seized. The OIC (P.W. 11) sent the seized weapons to the doctor for examination and opinion. On 25.02.93 he gave requisition to the SDJM, Bolangir to send the material objects for chemical examination. On completion of the investigation, the police submitted charge sheet against the accused persons in the Court of SDJM, Bolangir, who in his turn, committed the case to the Court of sessions for trial. The prosecution in order to substantiate its case examined as many as element witnesses and proved several documents which were marked as Exts., while the defence examined one witness in their favour and also proved several documents and pleaded not guilty of the offences charged against them and claimed to be tried. 3. On 09.01.1993 P.W. 2 was the Medical Officer in the Headquarters hospital, Bolangir. On that day, he conducted the autopsy of the dead body of Biranchi and submitted the Post Mortem Report, Ext. 2. It is evident from the report under Ext. 2 that the death was due to profuse- hemorrhage and shock following injuries to his vital organ like brain. On that day, he conducted the autopsy of the dead body of Biranchi and submitted the Post Mortem Report, Ext. 2. It is evident from the report under Ext. 2 that the death was due to profuse- hemorrhage and shock following injuries to his vital organ like brain. P.W. 2 has further deposed that the injury of the person of the deceased is possible by the sharp side of Tabli M.O.-I. From the report of the Medical Officer and his evidence it can be concluded that the deceased died homicidal death on account of injury on his head caused by a sharp cutting weapon. 4. Once it is held that the deceased met a homicidal death, the next question arises as to who are responsible for causing his death. Prosecution in this regard has relied upon the evidence of P. Ws. 1,3,4,6,7 and 10. Amongst them, P. Ws. 1,7 and 10 are injured, who have been examined by the Medical Officer, District Headquarters Hospital, Bolangir on the very day of occurrence. Therefore, the evidence of these witnesses carries great importance. P.W. 1, the brother of the deceased, who is also the informant in this case, has deposed that on 8.1.1993, at about 2 P.M. while he was sitting on his Verandah saw the accused person chasing Bilam Budek (P.W. 8). He immediately rushed to the spot and tried to rescue P.W. 8. At that time, he was assaulted by the accused Deba by means of a Geda (Lathi) on his left shoulder., Subsequently, other witnesses, namely; Kartika (P.W. 1), Sartika (P.W. 7), Biranchi, the deceased, arrived there. The accused persons assaulted them; as a result, some of them received injuries. Accused Suru instigated the other accused persons to kill them. At this, the accused Bhuban dealt a Tabli blow on the back side of the head of deceased Biranchi. As a result, there was profuse bleeding and he fell down. The deceased was first removed to Chudapali P.H.C. and subsequently to the Headquarters Hospital where he was declared dead. The evidence of P.W. 7 and 10, who had come to the spot and seen the assault on P.W. 8, are consistent with the evidence of P.W. 1. Both the witnesses to the occurrence have deposed that on being instigated Bhuban gave a blow by means of tabli (M.O.I) on the head of the deceased which caused profuse bleeding injury. The evidence of P.W. 7 and 10, who had come to the spot and seen the assault on P.W. 8, are consistent with the evidence of P.W. 1. Both the witnesses to the occurrence have deposed that on being instigated Bhuban gave a blow by means of tabli (M.O.I) on the head of the deceased which caused profuse bleeding injury. Though the witnesses were grilled by the defence during the cross-examination, but their evidence could not be discounted so as to impeach their credibility. Since all the three witnesses have received injuries, their presence at the scene of occurrence and seeing the assault on the deceased cannot be disbelieved. Further, P.W. 8, who was first assaulted by the accused persons categorically, deposed that all the above witnesses reached the spot to rescue him. Besides the above, there are also other witnesses who have seen the assault. P. Ws. 3 and 6 have also narrated the details of the incident starting from assault on P.W. 8 to the deceased. They are not only the co-villagers, but also they were having their houses close to the spot. All of them have unequivocally deposed that the accused Bhuban dealt a blow on the deceased as a consequence he received bleeding injuries. Combined reading of the evidence of all the witnesses P. Ws. 1, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 10 it can safely be concluded that the accused Bhuban is the author of the crime and the deceased died due to the assault. 5. The next important question falls for consideration is as to what offence the accused persons are liable. Admittedly, the deceased has received only one blow and the same is attributed to accused Bhuban. None of the other accused persons has assaulted the deceased nor has done any overt act facilitating in any manner for such assault. 6. It is in the evidence that some of the accused persons were armed with lathies and other weapons like axe etc. Yet none has used the same against the deceased. In such background facts and circumstances, it cannot be held that all the accused persons shared the common object to do away with the life of the deceased. Absence of common object can be judged from another angle. The occurrence started from the chasing of Bilam Budek (P.W. 8). Yet none has used the same against the deceased. In such background facts and circumstances, it cannot be held that all the accused persons shared the common object to do away with the life of the deceased. Absence of common object can be judged from another angle. The occurrence started from the chasing of Bilam Budek (P.W. 8). It is alleged that while he was being assaulted by the accused persons the witnesses along with the deceased came there. The accused persons started assaulting them. From the above scenario two things emerge, firstly, the accused persons had no knowledge that the deceased would reach the spot. Therefore, it cannot be inferred that the object of assault was to terminate the life of the deceased. Secondly, the quarrel was with P.W. 8. There was no reason as to why the accused persons would kill the deceased particularly when the deceased has not done any act or omission whereby the accused persons would be enraged and would go to the extent of taking away his life. It can be taken note of that P.W. 8, who alleges to have been chased and assaulted, was found unhurt. When the person from whom the quarrel ensued and the occurrence took place has not been hurt or injured at all in any manner, it would be reasonable to conclude that there was no common object or prior agreement to commit offence and cause murder of the deceased. 7. There are number of decisions of the Apex Court on this subject. Few of them are Bunnilal Chaudhary Vs. State of Bihar, ; Parsuram Pandey and Others Vs. The State of Bihar, ; Haramant Laxmappa Kukkadi and Others Vs. State of Karnataka, ; AIR 2004 SC 4900 , Shri Gopalo and Anr. v. Subhash & Ors; (2004) 3 SC 429, B.G. Shivaswamy v. State of Karnataka and Ors.; and Shivalingappa Kallayanappa and others Vs. State of Karnataka, . 8. Therefore, except the accused Bhuban no other can be held liable u/s 302 Indian Penal Code with the aid of Section 149 Indian Penal Code, as there was no common object. Consequently, their conviction under Sections 302/149 Indian Penal Code is liable to be set aside. 9. The deceased died on account of the injury sustained by him in course of the occurrence and the said injury is attributed to the accused Bhuban. Consequently, their conviction under Sections 302/149 Indian Penal Code is liable to be set aside. 9. The deceased died on account of the injury sustained by him in course of the occurrence and the said injury is attributed to the accused Bhuban. In such circumstances, it is to be seen as to what offence the accused Bhuban has committed. Admittedly, there was no prior enmity between the accused and the deceased. It is also an admitted fact that the accused had dealt only a single blow on the deceased. From the entire evidence it appears that no motive is spelt out. No further assault/overt act has been committed by the accused after the deceased fell down. Cumulative effect of all these circumstances, therefore, leads to the irresistible conclusion that the occurrence has taken place without any premeditation. It is also in the evidence that the quarrel preceded the assault. Taking all the attending circumstances into consideration, it can be held that the accused Bhuban has committed culpable homicide, but not murder and he can be convicted u/s 304-Part-I, Indian Penal Code instead of u/s 302 Indian Penal Code. 10. In the mean time accused Bhuban has served more than 12 years. Therefore he can be sentenced to the period already undergone. 11. So far accused - Suru is concerned, it is alleged that he instigated the accused persons and then accused Bhuban assaulted the deceased. It appears from the evidence of P.W. 4 that Bilam (P.W. 8) and accused Suru were abusing each other. At that point of time other accused persons reached there. Seeing them, the accused-Suru is alleged to have instigated. The allegation of instigation is conspicuously absent in the FIR P. Ws. 1,3,4 and 6 have not whispered about what exactly the accused Suru said which amounts to instigation. Bald allegation, that he instigated, is not sufficient. However, P. Ws. 7 & 10 have deposed giving the details. Accepting that on the instigation of accused-Suru, Bhuban assaulted the deceased, he (Bhuban) can at best be convicted u/s 304 Part-I Indian Penal Code as the real assailant has been convicted thereunder. Since he has also served more than 12 years incarceration, he is sentenced to the period already undergone. 12. 7 & 10 have deposed giving the details. Accepting that on the instigation of accused-Suru, Bhuban assaulted the deceased, he (Bhuban) can at best be convicted u/s 304 Part-I Indian Penal Code as the real assailant has been convicted thereunder. Since he has also served more than 12 years incarceration, he is sentenced to the period already undergone. 12. As regards the charge u/s 323 Indian Penal Code is concerned, the evidence of the witnesses reveals that the accused persons assaulted Bilam (P.W. 8), Sartika (P.W. 7), Kartika (P.W. 1), Abhi (P.W. 10). P. Ws. 1,7 and 10 have received some injuries on their person as have been found out by the Medical Officer (P.W. 9), who examined them just after the occurrence on the very day and has proved the injury report under Exts. 10 to 12. The evidence of P. Ws. 1,7 and 10 corroborate each other with regard to assault on them by the accused persons. Medical Report is also in consonance with the ocular evidence. In such circumstance, the conviction on this score is indefensible and accordingly, the same is confirmed. No separate sentence needs to be passed since the Appellants have already been convicted and sentenced u/s 304(1) Indian Penal Code. 13. The accused persons have raised a plea that the prosecution has not explained the injures on their person which they claimed to have received on account of assault by the prosecution party. In this regard, D.W.1 has testified himself and has proved the Medical Certificate under Exts. A to D. All the injuries found on the person of the accused persons are simple in nature. It is well settled in law that the prosecution is not required to explain all the injuries unless the same are grievous in nature. Therefore, non-explanation of injuries on the accused person is not fatal. 14. The appeal is dismissed with the aforesaid modification of conviction and sentence. 15. Appeal dismissed. Final Result : Dismissed