Honble SINGH, J.—Ramji Lal, Shambu Lal, Ram Kishore, Ram Prasad, Lala Ram and Kanhaiya Lal (appellants herein) were put to trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, Dausa who vide judgment dated December 6, 2003 convicted and sentenced the appellants as under: Ram Prasad : u/S. 302 IPC: to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs. 2,000/-, in default to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. Ram Kishore : u/S. 326 IPC: to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and six months and fine of Rs. 1000/-, in default to further suffer additional rigorous imprisonment for two months. Ramji Lal, Kanhaiya Lal, Shambhu and Lala Ram: u/S. 325 IPC: each of them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default to further suffer additional rigorous imprisonment for one month. Ramji Lal, Kanhaiya Lal, Shambhu and Lala Ram : u/S. 323 IPC: each of them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months. All the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently. (2). Briefly stated, the prosecution case is that informant Latoor Chand, by caste Dhobi, R/o village- Chawariya-bas lodged a written report at Police Station Lalsot, District Dausa on February 15, 2002 at 1.00 P.M. In the report, he stated that this daughter Manti had gone to `Jungle for grazing goats on February 14, 2002, she was caught by Ram Prasad and Lala Ram, both sons of Gopi Lal who tried to outrage her modesty. They left her when she started crying. In the evening, on return she narrated this to her mother. Then her mother went to the house of Ram Prasad and Lala Ram to protest and to tell them that they being brothers in relation, should not have indulged in such activities. But she was abused and driven out of the house. Then, the informant himself went to their house on February 15, 2002 in the morning to make them understand but they started abusing him. When the informant was returning to his house, Kanhaiya Lal, Kailash, Ram Vilas; Lala Ram, Ram Prasad, Sanotsh and Babu Lal, Anandi Lal, Shambhu Lal, Ram Kishore, Mohan Lal, Ramji Lal with their ladies Panchi, Ladbai, Rajanti, Kali and Samundra came armed with lathies, sticks and Kulhari, followed and assaulted him hear `Nala. When the informant was returning to his house, Kanhaiya Lal, Kailash, Ram Vilas; Lala Ram, Ram Prasad, Sanotsh and Babu Lal, Anandi Lal, Shambhu Lal, Ram Kishore, Mohan Lal, Ramji Lal with their ladies Panchi, Ladbai, Rajanti, Kali and Samundra came armed with lathies, sticks and Kulhari, followed and assaulted him hear `Nala. On hearing his cries, his family members Ram Gopal, Shambhu Lal, Mohan Lal and Smt. Parwati, Gayatri and Manti rushed but they were also beaten. The incident was seen by Rewad Mal, Shyam Murari and other villagers who brought the injured to their house. On the above report, a case u/S. 143, 341 and 323 IPC was registered at Police Station Lalsot and investigation commenced. On February 16, 2002, injured Gopal succumbed to the injuries in the hospital at Lalsot, his post mortem was conducted at 8.50 a.m. Accordingly, the case was converted to the offence u/S. 302 IPC. During investigation, necessary memos were drawn, statements of witnesses were recorded, accused persons were arrested and weapon of offence were recovered. After collecting necessary evidence, challan was filed against Ramji Lal, Shambu Lal, Anandi Lal, Ram Vilas, Kailash, Ram Kishore, Ram Prasad, Lala Ram, Kanhaiya Lal and Smt. Panchi Devi W/o Gopi Lal. (3). In due course, the case came up for trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dausa. Charges under Sections 147, 148, 323, 324/149, 341/149, 302/149, 302, 325/149, 326 and 326/149 IPC, were framed against the accused who denied the charges and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of its case, examined as many as 17 witnesses. In the explanation under section 313 Cr.P.C., the appellants claimed innocence. No witness in defence was however examined. Learned trial Judge after hearing final submissions, acquitted accused Smt. Panchi, Ram Vilas, Anandi Lal and Kailash while convicted and sentenced the appellants as indicated hereinabove. (4). We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor and with their assistance, scanned the material on record. (5). Death of Gopal was undeniably homicidal in nature. As per the post mortem report (Ex. P. 8) the following ante mortem injuries were found on his body: 1. A stitched wound 3.5 cm long on Right Parietal region of scalp. 2. A stitched wound 7 cm long on left fronto parietal region of scalp. 3. An abrasion 1 x 1 cm on Right little finger. In the opinion of Dr. P. 8) the following ante mortem injuries were found on his body: 1. A stitched wound 3.5 cm long on Right Parietal region of scalp. 2. A stitched wound 7 cm long on left fronto parietal region of scalp. 3. An abrasion 1 x 1 cm on Right little finger. In the opinion of Dr. Gopal Khandelwal (PW. 9), the death of Gopal was due to coma which was result of extra dural hematoma and injury to brain. (6). Deceased Gopal was examined for his injuries before death by Dr. B.M. Sharma (PW. 11) vide Ex. P. 15, who found the following injuries on his body: 1. Incised wound, 7 cm x 1 cm x bone deep, on the left side fronto-parietal region of the scalp, longitudinal in direction. Fresh blood clot present. 2. Lacerated wound, 3.5 cm x 1/2 cm x bone deep, on the (rt) occipito-parietal region of the scalp. Fresh blood clot present. (7). As per injury report of injured Smt. Prabhi W/o Gopal (Ex. P. 13), Dr. B.M. Sharma (PW. 11), found that there was swelling, 7 cm x 6 cm size, on the back of the lower part of the (rt) forearm. As per x-ray report of injured Smt. Prabhati W/o. Gopal, (Ex. P. 9), Dr. Abha Jain (PW. 10), found a fracture of lower end of ulna bone at right forearm. (8). As per injury report of injured Latoor (Ex. P. 16), Dr. B.M. Sharma (PW. 11), found the injures as under: 1. Incised wound, 6 cm x 1.5 cm x bone deep, on the back of the left elbow. Fresh blood clot present. 2. Swelling, 2.5 cm x 2 cm size, distal inter phalangeal joint of the back of the (rt) middle finger. 3. Lacerated wound, 2 cm x 1/2 cm x soft tissue deep, on the left fronto-parietal region of the scalp. Fresh blood clot present. 4. Abrasion, 2.5 cm x 1/2 cm size, on the back of the lower part or the (rt) forearm. 5. Two abrasions, 3 cm x 1/2 cm & 2 cm x 1/2 cm size, on the back of the upper part of the (rt) forearm. 6. Abrasion, 1 cm x 3/4 cm size, on the back of the lower part of the (rt) thumb. 7. Complain of pain on the (rt) elbow. As per x-ray report of injured Latoor (Ex. P.11), Dr. Abha Jain (PW. 6. Abrasion, 1 cm x 3/4 cm size, on the back of the lower part of the (rt) thumb. 7. Complain of pain on the (rt) elbow. As per x-ray report of injured Latoor (Ex. P.11), Dr. Abha Jain (PW. 10), found that there were fractures of left hand of ulna bone and also fractures of middle phalynex of middle finger of right hand. (9). As per injury report of injured Shambhu (Ex. P. 14), Dr. B.M. Sharma (PW. 11), found the injures as under: 1. Lacerated wound, 1 cm x 1 cm x skin deep, on the posterior part of the mid parietal region of the scalp, fresh blood clot present. 2. Complain of pain on the (rt) thigh. 3. Swelling, 6 cm x 4 cm size, on the outer side of the dorsal (upper) aspect of the (rt) foot, below & anterior to the (rt) ankle joint. Colour of skin red. (10). As per injury report of injured Mohan Lal (Ex. P. 3), Dr. B.M. Sharma (PW. 11), found the injures as under: 1. Lacerated wound, 1 cm x 1/2 cm x soft tissue deep, on the left side fronto-parietal region on the scalp. Fresh blood clot present. 2. Abrasion, 2.5 cm x 1/2 cm size, on the outer side on the (rt) wrist, back side. Fresh blood clot. 3. Abrasion, 2 cm x 1 cm size, on the back of the inner side of the lower part of the (rt) forearm. 4. Three abrasions, about 1 cm x 1/2 cm size to 1/2 cm x 1/2 cm size, on the back of the 4th & 3rd meta-corpophalangeal joints of the (rt) hand. Fresh blood clot. 5. Abrasion, 1 cm x 1/2 cm size, on the back of the proximal inter phalangeal joint of the (rt) index finger. Fresh blood clot. 6. Abrasion, 1 cm x 1/2 cm size, on the back of the proximal inter phalangeal joint of the (rt) middle finger. Fresh blood clot. 7. Abrasion, 2 cm x 1 cm size, on the upper part of the left shoulder. Fresh blood clot. (11). On reappraisal of evidence adduced by the prosecution, it is revealed that the incident occurred on February 15, 2002 in the morning on public way as shown in site map Ex. P. 1. Both complainant and accused party belonged to the same caste and they lived nearby the place of occurrence. Fresh blood clot. (11). On reappraisal of evidence adduced by the prosecution, it is revealed that the incident occurred on February 15, 2002 in the morning on public way as shown in site map Ex. P. 1. Both complainant and accused party belonged to the same caste and they lived nearby the place of occurrence. The cause behind the occurrence is stated to be some uncalled for remarks made against Manti (PW. 4) daughter of Latoor (PW. 3). In the incident Latoor (PW. 3), Mohan Lal (PW.2), Shambhu (PW. 17,) Smt. Prabhati (PW. 5) and Gopal (deceased) sustained injuries as narrated hereinabove. However, Gopal succumbed to the injuries on the following day in the hospital. Members of the assailant party Ram Kishore, Ramji Lal, Kailash, Shambhu, Ram Prasad, Lala Ram, Smt. Panchi and Ram Vilas also sustained injuries. They were examined vide injury report Ex. D.9 to Ex. D. 16 by Dr. B.M. Sharma (PW. 11). (12). Initially, ten accused persons mentioned hereinabove were put to trial for the offences u/S. 302, 326, 325, 341, 324 and 323 with the help of 149 IPC., though appellant Ram Prasad was specifically charge-sheeted for the offence u/S. 302 IPC simplicitor. The learned trial Judge, on appreciation of evidence arrived at the conclusion that it was not a case of unlawful assembly but a case of free fight in which both the parties sustained injuries. Accordingly, the learned trial Judge acquitted all the accused persons for the offences charged with the help of 149 IPC as well as for the offence u/S. 147 and 148 IPC. While Anandi Lal; Kailash, Smt. Panchi and Ram Vilas were acquitted for all the offences as no individual act constituting an offence was found to have been committed by them. While the appellants were convicted for the offences on the basis of their individual acts as indicated hereinabove. (13). In the above back drop, on analysing they testimony of the injured eye witnesses, it is revealed that Latoor (PW. 3) has deposed that Prasadi (Ram Prasad) inflicted a `Kulhari blow to Gopal (deceased) on head while Ram Kishore inflicted one `Kulhari blow on his (Latoor - PW 3) right hand and Lala Ram inflicted a `lathi blow on finger of his right hand causing a serious injury. 3) has deposed that Prasadi (Ram Prasad) inflicted a `Kulhari blow to Gopal (deceased) on head while Ram Kishore inflicted one `Kulhari blow on his (Latoor - PW 3) right hand and Lala Ram inflicted a `lathi blow on finger of his right hand causing a serious injury. This witnesses has admitted in cross examination that initially the parties engaged in abusing each other and then the fight ensued suddenly. Mohan Lal (PW. 2), Manti @ Banti (PW. 4), Smt. Prabhati (PW. 6), Smt. Gayatri Devi and Shambhu (PW. 17) have corroborated the testimony of Latoor (PW. 3). Ram Swaroop (PW. 7) has been declared hostile but he has corroborated the fact that the incident had taken place between the parties. The appellants in their statements u/S. 313 Cr.P.C., admitted the occurrence but claimed that in fact the complainant party had attacked and inflicted injuries to them. Thus, from the evidence adduced, it is revealed that the incident occurred all of a sudden and it was appellant Ram Prasad who inflicted the fatal `Kulhari blow to deceased Gopal while appellant Ram Kishore had inflicted a `Kulhari blow to Latoor (PW. 3) causing grievous hurt by sharp edged weapon resulting in fracture of left hand ulna bone. Likewise, it was appellant Lala Ram, who caused grievous hurt by blunt weapon on right hand finger of Latoor (PW. 3). While rest of appellants, Ramji Lal, Shambhu Lal and Kanhaiya Lal are not found to have caused any specific hurt for which they can be found to be individually responsible. (14). As a result of the above discussion, it is revealed that the incident occurred all of a sudden and in the incident as many as five persons of the complainant party and eight persons of the accused party were injured and appellant Ram Prasad himself had sustained injuries. Since appellant Ram Prasad is found to have inflicted the fatal blow in the fight ensued but he did not repeat the blow, it can be presumed that he had knowledge that blow inflicted by him was likely to cause death of Gopal, even though he had no intention of causing death or such bodily injury as was likely to cause death. Since Ram Prasad did not behave in cruel and unusual manner, we find him guilty of the offence punishable under Part II of Section 304 IPC instead of section 302 IPC. Since Ram Prasad did not behave in cruel and unusual manner, we find him guilty of the offence punishable under Part II of Section 304 IPC instead of section 302 IPC. Likewise, the prosecution has also proved offence u/S. 326 IPC as against appellant Ram Kishore and offence u/S. 325 IPC as against Lala Ram on the basis of their individual acts while as against appellants Ramji Lal, Shambhu and Kanhaiya Lal, no offence has been proved beyond doubt. (15). For these reasons, we dispose of the instant appeal in the following terms:- (i) we partly allow the appeal of Ram Prasad and instead of Section 302 we convict him under section 304 Part II IPC. Looking to the fact that Ram Prasad has already undergone confinement for a period of more than six years, the ends of justice would be met in sentencing him to the period already undergone by him in confinement. The appellant Ram Prasad, who is in jail, shall be set at liberty forthwith, if he is not required to be detained in any other case. (ii) We find no merit in the appeal of appellant Ram Kishore and the same accordingly stands dismissed. Conviction and sentence of appellant Ram Kishore under Section 326 IPC are maintained. Bail bonds of appellant Ram Kishore stand cancelled and he shall be taken in custody forthwith. (iii) We also do not find any merit in the appeal of appellant Lala Ram and dismiss the same. Conviction and sentence of appellant Lala Ram under Section 325 IPC are maintained. We however acquit him of the charge under Section 323 IPC. Bail bonds of appellant Lala Ram stand cancelled and he shall be taken in custody forthwith. (iv) We allow appeals of appellants Ramji Lal, Shambhoo Lal and Kanhaiya Lal and acquit them of the charges under Sections 325 and 323 IPC. They are on bail, they need not surrender and their bail bonds stand discharged. (v) The impugned judgment of learned trial court stands modified as indicated above.