Judgment ( 1. ) SINCE all the the aforesaid three appeals arise out of one and the same judgment, therefore, they are being decided by this common judgment. ( 2. ) THE appellants named above, by preferring these appeals under section 374 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, assail the legality and validity of their conviction under sections 148 and 302 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and consequent. sentences of R. I. for one year and fine of Rs. . 2,000/, in default of payment of fine to suffer additional R. I. for six months and imprisonment for life each respectively, passed on 29. 11. 2004 by learned Special Judge under SC and st (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Dhar in Special Sessions Trial No. 57/2004. It has also been directed that out of the amount of fine so realized, Rs. 14,000/- be paid as compensation under section 357 Cr. P. C. to Smt. Rajubai, the wife of deceased Bhuwan Singh. ( 3. ) BRIEFLY stated, the prosecution case as unfolded before the trial Court is that on 04. 06. 03, Bhuwan Singh, after completing his duty in M. P. E. B. Dhar, was returning in the evening on motor cycle to his village Bhdota Khurd. At 4. 07 PM all the appellants armed with Dharia and Lathis stopped him and abused filthily in the name of his mother and sister. He was also abused in the name of his caste and appellant Charan Singh assaulted him by Dharia (a sharp edged weapon)and remaining six appellants by Lathis. Bhuwan Singh (since deceased) sustained number of injuries on his person caused by sharp edged weapon and hard and blunt object. On cry being raised by Bhuwan Singh, his son PW-3 Gaurav reached on the spot and thereafter, immediately called his mother PW-2 Rajubai,. PW-5 sanjubai and PW-1 Khemraj, respectively daughter and neighbour of the deceased. They also reached on the spot. Appellants seeing them fled away from the scene of occurrence. The deceased was assaulted because of dispute with the appellant hate Singh in regard to embankment of their field. All the aforesaid three witnesses brought the deceased Bhuwan Singh in injured condition to his house. PW-2 rajubai gave information on telephone to Sadalpur Police Station, PW-12 AS I atar Singh, after receiving information about quarrel. The deceased was assaulted because of dispute with the appellant hate Singh in regard to embankment of their field. All the aforesaid three witnesses brought the deceased Bhuwan Singh in injured condition to his house. PW-2 rajubai gave information on telephone to Sadalpur Police Station, PW-12 AS I atar Singh, after receiving information about quarrel. , reached in the village of incident and found Bhuwan Singh in injured condition in his house. ASI Atar singh recorded Dehati Nalishi Ex. P/5 at the instance of deceased and recorded the statement of deceased Ex. P/30 as per provision under section 161 of the Cr. P. C. On the basis of this Dehati Nalishi, First Information Report Ex. P/31 was registered by PW-12 Atar Singh ASI. Bhuwan Singh was sent to Bhoj -Hospital, Dhar in police vehicle wherehe was medically examined by Dr N. ,d. Saraf (PW-7) in the night at 10. 20 PM. At that time, condition of Bhuwan Singh was serious and he was unconscious. Dr Saraf gave medical report Ex. P/25. During the course of medical examination by Dr Saraf, Bhuwan Singh succumbed to the injuries. Intimatiop Ex. P/ 26 to this effect was sent to the Police Station. Police prepared inquest report Ex,p/ 4 and sent the dead body for postmortem examination which was conducted by PW-8 Dr S. L. Gupta on 05. 05. 06. The postmortem, report is Ex. P/27. PW-13 SDOP r. A. Verma prepared the spot map Ex. P/34 and also effected seizure of blood stained, controlled earth, wrist watch and motor cycle vide seizure memo Ex. P/6 from the spot. Blood stained clothes of deceased were also seized. The appellants were nabbed and on their disclosure statements vide Ex. P/13 to P/18, Dharia and lathis were seized. The seizure memos are vide Ex. P/19 ro P/24. The seized articles were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical examination and its report is ex. P/41. On completion of investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellants for having committed the offences punishable under sections 148 and 302 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3 (2) (v) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities)- Act. ( 4. ) THE appellants refuted the charges and pleaded their false implication on account of enmity. Their defence was that the deceased Bhuwan Singh sustained injuries by fall from motor cycle. ( 4. ) THE appellants refuted the charges and pleaded their false implication on account of enmity. Their defence was that the deceased Bhuwan Singh sustained injuries by fall from motor cycle. They did not examine any witness in their defence whereas the prosecution has examined in total 13 witnesses and adduced 44 documents to prove its case. Learned trial Court found the prosecution case duly proved, convicted and sentenced the appellants as mentioned herein-above. ( 5. ) LEARNED counsel for the appellants submitted that looking to the number and nature of external and internal injuries on the person of the deceased, he could not be in a position even to speak and to give a detailed graphic statement. of the incident which recorded as Dehati Nalishi Ex. P/5 by ASI PW-12 Atar singh and thereafter his statement as per provision under section 161 of the Cr. P. C. Ex. P/30 and that the story of reaching of PW-12 Atar Singh AS in the village on the basis of telephonic message, transmitted to him, is concocted ;piece of evidence which did not find place in the case-diary statements of all the three eye witnesses pw-2 Rajubai, PW-3 Gaurav and PW-5 Sanjubai. wife, son and daughter of deceased respectively. It is also pointed out that the Atar Singh has given contradictory statement with regard to receiving information from (Police Station when he was already on patrolling duty and all the three witnesses have given contradictory statements in Court about informing the pol;ice on telephone. It is also argued out that though ASI Atar Singh reached in the village in the night, but the statement of eye-witnesses were recorded on the next day and this delay has not been explained by the prosecution and that by own saying of the eye-witnesses, the incident took place in a residential locality and several persons were present, but none of them was examined as an independent witness. Learned counsel has also pointed out material omission and contradictions in the statement of PW-3 eye witness Gaurav, the son of deceased. In case-diary statement Ex. D/2 of pw-3 Gaurav, the names of only three appellants viz. Hate Singh, Charan Singh and Umrao Singh were mentioned, but in the Court, he improved his statement naming all the seven appellants and for this he failed to give any explanation. ( 6. In case-diary statement Ex. D/2 of pw-3 Gaurav, the names of only three appellants viz. Hate Singh, Charan Singh and Umrao Singh were mentioned, but in the Court, he improved his statement naming all the seven appellants and for this he failed to give any explanation. ( 6. ) ON the other hand, learned State counsel - submitted that for delay in recording the statements of eye witnesses, no question was put to the concerned police officer by the defence counsel affording him an opportunity of giving explanation, therefore, the appellants would not be entitled to get any benefit and prosecution witnesses have given clear statement about telephonic message given to the police, thereafter, their arrival of police and recording of statement of the deceased so far as question of fitness of the deceased at the time of recording of dehati palish at his instance and his statement Ex. P/5,and P/30 respectively are concerned, it depends upon physical and mental power of an individual and there is no hard and fast rule that after sustaining such injuries as sustained by the deceased, the deceased could not be in a position even to speak. Over and all, learned State counsel has supported the impugned judgment and finding arrived at by the learned trial Court. ( 7. ) HAVING heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the entire record, we find that the conviction of the appellant is biased on two sets of evidence, first is the Dehati Nalishi Ex. P/5 and statement of deceased Ex. P/30 which have been considered as Dying Declaration of the deceased by the trial court as per provision under section 32 ( 1) of the Indian Evidence Act and second, the eye witnesses account of PW-2 Rajubai, PW-3 Gaurav and PW-5 Sanjubai, all these three witnesses are interested and partisan witnesses. It is trite law that the evidence of interested and partisan witnesses cannot be discarded in its entirety only on this ground, but the same is required to be scrutinized with great care and caution. We would first deal with the point whether the Dehati nalishi Ex. P/5 is a genuine piece of evidence or not and whether PW-12. Atar singh, scribe of this document had really reached on the basis of telephonic message sent by PW-2 Rajubai, wife of the deceased Bhuwan Singh. ( 8. We would first deal with the point whether the Dehati nalishi Ex. P/5 is a genuine piece of evidence or not and whether PW-12. Atar singh, scribe of this document had really reached on the basis of telephonic message sent by PW-2 Rajubai, wife of the deceased Bhuwan Singh. ( 8. ) PW-2 Rajubai has deposed that on the date of incident in the evening at 6 to 7. 00 PM, she was in her house and her son PW-3 Gaurav came to her and disclosed that "mummy, PAPA KO MAAR RAHE HAIN". He disclosed the names of all the seven appellants. At that time, PW-1 Khemraj alias Khemaji was present. She immediately rushed to the field of one Bherav Singh (not examined by the prosecution) and the said field and place of incident was in front of the house of one Lai Singh (not examine ). She saw that all the appellants were assaulting the deceased. Appellant Charan Singh was having a Dharia and remaining six were having lathis. She jaised alarm because of which appellants while abusing" ran away. Here it would not be irrelevant to mention that the close relatives of the deceased would not spare the real culprit, but at the same time, they are also not immune to implicate the innocent person of their opposite faction along with real culprit. Keeping in mind this legal preposition, we deal first the evidence of eye witnesses. ( 9. ) THE independent witness Khemraj has turned hostile to the prosecution, but he has also stated that PW-3 Gaurav , son of the deceased "came to him and disclosed that his father wasbeing beaten and he went along with him in the field of one Bheray Singh where the wife of deceased and daughter were there (in the statement of this witness Khemraj in para 2, it is not clearly mentioned as to who those two persons were, but looking to the entire prosecution case, daughter of deceased PW-5 Sanjubai had also reached on the spot ). He found the deceased in injured condition having injuries on his legs and hands and same were bleeding. He did not ask any thing, but again he stated that on his query the-deceased did not disclose anything and he had not seen any body on the spot at that time. He found the deceased in injured condition having injuries on his legs and hands and same were bleeding. He did not ask any thing, but again he stated that on his query the-deceased did not disclose anything and he had not seen any body on the spot at that time. It is clear from the statement of this witness Khemraj as well as PW-2 Rajubai that the son of deceased PW-3 Gaurav was the first witness who saw the incident. PW-3 Gaurav, a boy of 10 years age has testified that on the date of incident between 6 and 7. 00 PM he was playing in the village. At that time, his father was coming on motor cycle to the village and a lathi blow was dealt because of which he fell down on the ground, thereafter, appellant Charan Singh assaulted him by Dharia and other appellants assaulted him by lathis. He immediately rushed to his house and disclosed to his mother PW-2 Rajubai and he along with his mother and PW-1 Khemraj went on the spot. At that time, all the appellants were assaulting the deceased. His mother raised cry on which the appellants ran away. At that moment, his sister Sanjubai (PW-5) also reached on the spot. They brought the deceased at their house who was having injuries on all over his body and his sister PW-5 Sanjubai made a call to the police and his mother talked on telephone. Thereafters police reached at his house and recorded the statement of his father who disclosed the names of all the appellants. PW-3 Gaurav was confronted with his case-diary statement Ex,. D/2 in cross-examination paras 8 arid 9 and he failed to assign any reason about clear omission of the names of appellants Rama, alias Ramlal, Subhash, Mohan and Kalu. In his case-diary statement Ex. D/2, names of appellants i. e. Hate Singh, Charan Singh and Umarao singh are mentioned. This witness has made clear improvement and gave contradictory statement in Court about presence of these four appellants on the spot at the time of incident of assaulting the deceased. ( 10. ) THE statement of PW-3 Gaurav (Ex. D/2) was recorded by PW-13 SDOP r. A. Verma. He also recorded the statements of almost all prosecution witnesses on 05. 06. 03. He received diary on 05. 06. 03 in Police Station Sadalpur when he returned back from. ( 10. ) THE statement of PW-3 Gaurav (Ex. D/2) was recorded by PW-13 SDOP r. A. Verma. He also recorded the statements of almost all prosecution witnesses on 05. 06. 03. He received diary on 05. 06. 03 in Police Station Sadalpur when he returned back from. the place of incident. In para 47, he deposed that PW-3 gaurav in his statement Ex. D/2 mentioned only the names of appellants Hate singh, Charan Singh and Umrao Singh and did not disclose the names of other appellants and he also did not disclose that at the time of incident his sister PW-5 sanjubai had also reached In view of this important and material contradiction in the statement of star eye witness PW-3 Gaurav, it is clear that, on the spot the deceased was assaulted only by appellants Hate Singh, Charan Singh and Umrao Singh. ( 11. ) THIS is true that the statements of all the material and important witnesses were recorded by PW-13 R. A. Verma on 05. 06. 03, but the appellants cannot get any benefit on this count, because no questions were put to Shri Verma as well as PW-12 ASI Atar Singh as to why the statement of all the three eye witnesses could not be recorded in the same night of the incident or at the earliest point of time. No opportunity was given to these witnesses to explain the delay in recording the statements. Apex Court in the case of Sunil Kumar and another V/s State of Rajas than [ (2005)9 SCC 283 -] has observed that delay in examination of-witnesses, by itself does not render the prosecution suspicious unless explanation for delay is called for. The defence cannot derive any advantage of delay without affording opportunity to the prosecution witness/witnesses to explain the same. ( 12. ) PW-3 Gaurav has also not mentioned the name of his sister PW-5 Sanjubai as an eye witness of the incident in his case-diary statement Ex. D/2 and improved the statement in Court. Regarding presence of PW-5 Sanjubai, PW-2 Rajubai has no-where stated that Sanjubai also reached with her on the spot when gaurav gave information about assault to the deceased. In para 4, she has stated only that the deceased was brought in the house by her daughter Sanjubai, son Gaurav and PW-1 Khemaji. D/2 and improved the statement in Court. Regarding presence of PW-5 Sanjubai, PW-2 Rajubai has no-where stated that Sanjubai also reached with her on the spot when gaurav gave information about assault to the deceased. In para 4, she has stated only that the deceased was brought in the house by her daughter Sanjubai, son Gaurav and PW-1 Khemaji. According to PW-5 Sanjubai on the date of incident in the evening at 6. 00 PM her father deceased Bhuwan Singh was coming on motor cycle and she was returning from the field to her house. At that time, she saw that the appellant Charan Singh inflicted Dharia-blow because of which her father fell down on the ground from motor cycle and thereafter, all the appellants started assaulting him. She raised cry on which her mother reached on the spot. She has also stated that her brother Gaurav went to call her mother and thereafter, mother and PW-1 Khemraj reached on the spot. Her this statement is contradictory with her case-diary statement Ex. D/3 wherein it is not mentioned that Giaurav PW-3 went to the house and returned back with her mother. : presence of Sanjubai on the spot as an eye witness of the incident is not mentioned by Giaurav in his case-diary statement Ex. D/2. On assessment of the statements of all the three eye witnesses, we come to the conclusion that PW-3 Gaurav was the eye witness who saw only three appellants assaulting the deceased and thereafter, went to his house and gave information to his mother and returned along with PW-1 Khemraj and mother to the spot. By that time, the accused persons were not on the spot. PW-3 Gaurav has stated in para 6 specifically that when the deceased was being assaulted, several persons were witnessing the incident. In para 4 PW-2 Rajubai has also deposed that the incident was being witnessed by so many persons but, none came forward for rescue of her husband. None of those persons who were witnessing the incident have been examined by the prosecution. ( 13. ) NOW we discuss about veracity of Dehati Nalishi Ex. P/5 and the statement of deceased Ex:p/30 recorded- by PW-12 Atar Singh ASI. None of those persons who were witnessing the incident have been examined by the prosecution. ( 13. ) NOW we discuss about veracity of Dehati Nalishi Ex. P/5 and the statement of deceased Ex:p/30 recorded- by PW-12 Atar Singh ASI. PW-2 Rajubai has also stated in para 4 that after bringing the deceased in the house, she had asked him (the deceased) as to who had assaulted him, on which the deceased disclosed the names of all the appellants. Thereafter,s he had a talk on telephone with head Constable Gauri Shahkar of P. S. Sadalpur and she told him that her husband received number of injuries and they must come immediately. Thereafter, the police reached and recorded the statement of her husband. In para 13, she has stated that on telephone she disclosed each and every narration of the incident and names of the assailants i. e. all the seven appellants. But her this version is contradicted by PW-12 ASI Atar Singh who proved the daily-diary entry Ex. P/ 32 and P/33-C wherein at Serial No. 92, time of information is mentioned as 7. 40 pm (19. 40 hours*) and that from village Bhidota Sambhar some unknown person gave information on telephone that in the village there was a quarrel with Bhuwan singh and receiver of telephone was put down. In this document, it is also mentioned that immediately information was given to ASI for going on the spot. It is pertinent to mention here that on the document Ex. P/29-C daily-diary entry no. 91 of the same day recorded at 6. 30 PM shows that PW-12 ASI Atar Singh along with Head Constable Munnalal and con stable Ramesh proceeded from police station on petrolling duty towards village Kherod Teesgaon. Prior to receiving information about quarrel by unknown person, as recorded in daily-diary no. . P/33-C) the ASI PW-12 Atar Singh had already left the Police Station. PW-12 ASI Atar Singh in para 2 in examination-in-chief recorded on 17. 03. 04 has deposed that while on petrolling duty of village Kherod, he received wireless message that in village Bhidota Khurd quarrel ensued with Bhuwan Singh and he reached to village Bhidota. In cross-examination para 13, the say of this witness is that he was on petrolling duty in village Kherod situated at a distance of seven kms. An d he received information on wireless at 7. In cross-examination para 13, the say of this witness is that he was on petrolling duty in village Kherod situated at a distance of seven kms. An d he received information on wireless at 7. 40 PM about the incident and he was not knowing whether intimation was given to Police Station by a male or a female. Immediately after receiving information, he proceeded tro village bhidota which was 20 Kms. Away from village Kherod and across several villages are there on the way. He expressed his ignorance about shorter route by Kachcha road and went through Pucca road. In para 23, he has stated that when he went on petrolling duty, there was no wireless set available in the vehicle and he was also not having mobile pone, then the question arises as to how he received information at such a long distance from the Police Station about the incident. His cross-examination could not be concluded on 17. 03:04, therefore, he was again cross-examined on 14. 05. 04 and On this date, the Prosecutor put a specific question in re-examination that when he was not having wireless set in the police jeep as well as the mobile phone, then how he received information and he deposed that he was having walky-talky. This appears to be an afterthought story, because if it was true, he would have not mentioned in examination-in-chief para 2 that he received information on wireless and when in cross-examination he asked about non-availability of wireless set in the vehicle while on petrolling duty, the situation was got explained after two months in the re-examination. ( 14. ) THE homicidal death of deceased has not been disputed by the defence before the trial Court as well as before this Court. Even otherwise in view of the evidence of PW-7 Dr N. D. Saraf who proved the MLC report of deceased (Ex. P/ 25) it appears that the Bhuwan Singh sustained following injuries on his person: 1. 1,1/2 x 1 CM incised wound lateral side of left lower leg. 6" above the first injury, were was a linear incised wound 2. 6 x 2 CM long reddish colour over post surface of left lower leg 3. 8 x 2cm reddish colour above above the third injury. 4. Contusion over posterior lateral side of right lower leg lx 2 CM reddish colour. 5. 6" above the first injury, were was a linear incised wound 2. 6 x 2 CM long reddish colour over post surface of left lower leg 3. 8 x 2cm reddish colour above above the third injury. 4. Contusion over posterior lateral side of right lower leg lx 2 CM reddish colour. 5. Multiple contusions over back of chest and abdomen reddish in colour. 6. Multiple contusions over both upper and lateral arms 7. Abrasions 1 x 14 CM on left forearm. 8. A small abrasion on forehead medial side of right eye. 9. 1 x 2 CM long incised wound lateral surface of right leg injuries No. 1 and 2 and 10 could be caused by sharp and hard object and other injuries could be caused by blunt and hard object. ( 15. ) ACCORDING to Dr Saraf, the deceased was unconscious and his general condition was ;poor, pulse was not record able. He examined the deceased o n 04. 06. 03 at 10. 02 PM. By letter Ex. P/26, Dr Saraf sent intimation of death to dhar Police. Dr Saraf has no-where stated that the deceased was brought to the hos;p ital by his wife, daughter or any relative. No history is mentioned about sustaining of injuries by the deceased. Normally in medico legal matters the doctors use to mention these facts. ( 16. ) PW-8 Dr S. L. Gupta proved the postmortem report Ex. P/27 of Bhuwan singh and found following external and internal injuries on his person:- I. Incised wound. 1,1/2 x 1 CM x 3. 5 CM on left leg lower. side 2. 1. 5x1. 2 x l/2 CM Incised wound on left teg mid third" 3. Contusion 6x2. 4 CM post surface of leg. 4. Contusion 4,5 x 3. 8 CM post surface of right leg 5. Multiple contusion post cut left and right side chest. 6. Multiple conusion back of chest 8 front of abdomen 7. Abrasion 1 x !4 CM left forearm 8. Abrasion on left forearm 9. Abrasion 2. 5 CM x Vi CM left forehead. 10. Contusion left lower eye lid. II. Contusion 3. 8 CM x 2. 7 CM right wrist. ( 17. ) DR Gupta found multiple fractures on left side of chest of the deceased. His left and right lungs-were swollen. Abrasion on left forearm 9. Abrasion 2. 5 CM x Vi CM left forehead. 10. Contusion left lower eye lid. II. Contusion 3. 8 CM x 2. 7 CM right wrist. ( 17. ) DR Gupta found multiple fractures on left side of chest of the deceased. His left and right lungs-were swollen. Peritoneum was congested, spleen and kidney were ruptured, In his opinion, the death could be caused by shock and hemorrhage due to. injuries on vital organs. In cross-examination para 10, he deposed that in view of the injuries sustained by the deceased he may be in coma (shock) immediately. However, critical question before us, to appreciate, is that after sustaining such serious injuries, damaging several vital organs, could the deceased remain in full conscious condition to give each and every minute details of the incident as shown in Dehati Nalishi Ex. P/5 recored by ASI PW-12 atar Singh. ( 18. ) ACCORDING to eye-witness PW-3 Gaurav the time of incident was between 6 and 7. 00 PM and Dehati Nalishi was recorded the same day at 8. 40 PM. PW-12 ASI- Atar Singh has also recorded the statement of deceased as per ;provision under Section 161 of the Cr. P. C. Ex. P/30. This also is a very detailed statement and is almost all verbatim of Dehati Nalishi Ex. P/5 about sequence of the names of the appellants, their overt act and other minute details of the incident. It is not conceivable that after sustaining the aforementioned external and internal injuries after about two hours without any medical aid, the deceased could remain in such a condition to give a graphic and minute detail of the incident, not only once but twice. ( 19. ) VERSION of Sanjubai (PW-5), daughter of deceased, is that between 5. 30 and 6. 00 PM on the date of incident her father was returning on motor cycle to village and she was returning from the field to her house. She saw that the appellant Charan Singh dealt a Dharia-bl;ow because of which deceased fell down from the motor cycle. Thereafter, all the appellants assasulted him. On seeing all this, she started raising cry loudly and her mother (PW-2 Rajubai reached over there and appellants while abusing her mother, fled away. She corrected her version that her mother reached on the spot on calling by her brother Gasurav (PW-3 ). Thereafter, all the appellants assasulted him. On seeing all this, she started raising cry loudly and her mother (PW-2 Rajubai reached over there and appellants while abusing her mother, fled away. She corrected her version that her mother reached on the spot on calling by her brother Gasurav (PW-3 ). In cross-examination, contradictions and omissions were put to this witness with her case-diary statement Ex. D/3. As discussed herein-above, in the light of omissions and contradictions, in the statements of all the three eye-witnesses, it is crystal clear that at the time of incident, out of these three witnesses, PW-3 Gaurav witnessed the incident first in point of time and he mentioned the names of only three appellants viz. Charan Singh,- Hate Singh and Umerao Singh. He has mentioned the presence of his sister PW-5 Sanjubai who has deposed that she raised cry loudly attracting her mother and Gaurav went to call her mother. In view of modulated statement given by ASI Atarsingh (PW-12) regarding receiving message from Police Station about the incident, missing of name of a person in daily-diary Ex. P/33-C, absence of names of the appellants and above discussed medical evidence, we are of the considered view that PW-3 Gaurav only witnessed the incident and there is consistency in his statement about assaulting of the deceased by three appellants, the document ex. P/5 Dehati Nalishi and statement of deceased Ex. P/30 do hot inspire confidence for placing reliance on them against all seven accused persons as dying Declarations of the deceased Bhuwan Singh. ( 20. ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant Charan Singh has also submitted that according to eye witnesses" account and medical evidence, Charan Singh caused superficial incise wounds to the deceased which did not contribute for his death. Therefore, He would not be liable for commission of offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. We do not find any force in this argument, because looking to the njumber and nature of injuries caused by three appellants, they came together. Appellant Charan Singh caused three blows by sharp aged weapon (Dharia), they were having motive. It is a different matter that blows did not cause serious injuries , but he tried his level best. We do not find any force in this argument, because looking to the njumber and nature of injuries caused by three appellants, they came together. Appellant Charan Singh caused three blows by sharp aged weapon (Dharia), they were having motive. It is a different matter that blows did not cause serious injuries , but he tried his level best. For constituting the offence with the aid of section 34 of the Indian Penal code, the direct evidence seldomly is available and it has to be judged from surrounding circumstances. We are fully convinced that on account of land dispute, these three appellants stopped the deceased on the way while coming after performing his duties, it appears that they were aware of time -table of the deceased, therefore,all the three appellants constituted common intention to commit murder of deceased, assaulted him, in furtherance of their common intention which resulted into his death. The statement of PW-3 Gaurav is fully corroborated by medical evidence. The legal maxim "falsus in uno,falsus in omnibus", means false on one point would be false on all points, is not applicable in our country. It is sacrosanct duty of the Court to separate the grain from the chaff and on doing so, we find the prosecution case full proved beyond reasonable doubt only against appellants Charan Singh, Hate Singh and Umrao Singh. ( 21. ) IN the wake of the aforesaid legal and factual discussion, conviction and sentence of all the appellants under sections 148 and 302 read with section 149 of the Indian Penal Code are hereby set aside. Instead thereof in Cri. A. No. 1251/ 04, Charan Singh is convicted under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian penal Code. In Cri. A. No. 1223/04, Hate Singh is convicted under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and in Cri. A. No. 05/0a, Umrao singh is convicted under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal code It is settled law that if accused is charged with the aid of section 149 of the indian Penal Code on alteration of conviction, he can be convicted with the aid of section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. [ See: Karnail Singh V/s State of Punjab ( AIR 1954 SC 204 )]. [ See: Karnail Singh V/s State of Punjab ( AIR 1954 SC 204 )]. Each of these three appellants is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer additional R. I. for one year. The remaining appellants, namely, rama alias Ramlal, Subhash, Mohan and Kalu are accordingly acquitted. They are in jail. Learned trial Court is directed to release them forthwith if not wanted in connection with any other criminal Case. On realization of amount of fine, Rs. 14,000/- shall be paid as compensation to Rajubai wife of deceased Bhuwan Singh r/o village Bhidota Khurd P. S. Sadaipur. ( 22. ) LET a copy of this judgment along with its record be transmitted to the trial court for immediate compliance. Original judgment be retained in the record of cri. A. No. 1223/04 and its copy each be placed in the records of Cri. A. No. 1251/04 and 05/05. Order accordingly.