ORAL JUDGMENT AMARESH KUMAR LAL, J. This appeal has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 7.09.1990 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banka in Sessions Trial No.344/1984/103/1990 arising out of Banka P.S. Case No.409/1988 by which the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and further rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for the offence punishable under Section 4(A) of the Explosive Substances Act and both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. 2. According to the fardbeyan (Ext.2), the prosecution case, in brief, is that on 27.09.1988 at about 9.50 A.M., the informant Laxmi Devi (P.W.7), wife of deceased Banarasi Das and her niece Madhu Kumari (P.W.14), aged about 10 years were going to Banka Bazar for purchasing clothes. When they reached near the field of Umesh Jha, she saw that accused Anod Das (appellant), Khedan Das, Ashok Das, Anirudh Das and Sikandar Das, all of village-Vijaynagar were sitting. As soon as the informant with her husband and niece reached there, the aforesaid five accused stood up and started abusing her husband (deceased). Anoj Das (appellant) instigated others to kill her husband. Khedan Das and Ashok Das caught hold of her husband. Anirudh Das and Sikandar Das were carrying bag. Her husband tried to free from the clutch of Khedan Das and Ashok Das but all the accused thrashed her husband. The informant raised alarm, Anoj Das (appellant) took out bomb from the bag of Sikandar Das and assaulted her husband which caused him injuries by explosion. On raising alarm and after hearing the sound of explosion, Sumitra Devi (P.W.12), Umesh Das (P.W.9), Sahdeo Das (P.W.11) and others came there. Thereafter, Ashok Das and Khedan Das shot fire which did not hit any one. Many persons assembled there and all the accused fled towards eastern side. Banarasi Das (deceased), the husband of the informant was put on the Thela for going to hospital. Her husband conveyed the persons accompanying him that Anoj Das (appellant) exploded bomb on his person and took immediately for treatment. The injured Banarsai Das became senseless by the time of reaching the hospital where the doctor declared him dead. Banarasi Das (deceased), the husband of the informant was put on the Thela for going to hospital. Her husband conveyed the persons accompanying him that Anoj Das (appellant) exploded bomb on his person and took immediately for treatment. The injured Banarsai Das became senseless by the time of reaching the hospital where the doctor declared him dead. The reason for the occurrence was the land dispute between the husband of the informant (deceased0 with the accused Khedan Das and for which her husband was falsely implicated in criminal case and had recently been bailed out. It has been further stated that in the last night when she was returning with her husband from Banka after visiting cinema at 10 P.M., she saw the aforesaid accused and others at the bungalow of Suresh Das holding meeting which was suspected as the conspiracy against her husband. On the basis of aforesaid fardbeyan, Banka P.S. Case No.409/88 was instituted on 27.09.1988. After investigation, charge-sheet was submitted against the accused including the appellant. Cognizance was taken. The case was committed to the court of sessions. The charges against the appellant were framed for the offence punishable under Sections 302 and 148 of the I.P.C. and Section 3 and 4 (a) of the Explosive Substances Act and charges were also framed against the other accused for the offence punishable under Sections 302/34 and 148 of the I.P.C. and further Anirudh Das and Sikandar Das were charged for the offence punishable under Section 4 (b) of the Explosive Substances Act and also under Section 120B of the I.P.C. to which they denied and claimed to be tried. Thereafter, the trial proceeded against eleven accused including the appellant. After the trial, all the accused except the appellant have been acquitted as the charges against them were not proved beyond all reasonable doubts and the appellant has been convicted and sentenced as stated above. 3. The defence of the accused is of false implication in the case due to group rivalry. It has been alleged that the deceased Banarasi Das alongwith witness Kali Das and others led one group in the village and all the accused belonged to another group as alleged by the prosecution itself, as such, they have been falsely implicated in this case. 4. It has been alleged that the deceased Banarasi Das alongwith witness Kali Das and others led one group in the village and all the accused belonged to another group as alleged by the prosecution itself, as such, they have been falsely implicated in this case. 4. Now, this Court is required to reappraise the evidence as to whether the prosecution has been able to substantiate its charge beyond shadow of reasonable doubt. 5. The prosecution has examined the following witnesses in order to prove the charges : P.W.1 Gopal Das, P.W.2 Naresh Thakur, P.W.3 Biro Yadav, P.W.4 Puran Das, P.W.5 Jitendra Das, P.W.6 Dr. C.S. Kashyap, P.W.7 Laxmi Devi, P.W.8 Sairu Das, P.W.9 Umesh Das, P.W.10 Kali Das, P.W.11 Jai Prakash Das @ Sahdeo Das, P.W.12 Sumitra Devi, P.W.13 Kedar Nath Sinha and P.W.14 Madhu Kumari. 6. No evidence has been adduced on behalf of the defence in support of their case. 7. P.W.1 is the co-villager of the deceased. He has stated that he came out of his house after hearing the explosion. Banarasi Das (deceased) was lying in the injured condition in the orchard of Govind Jha. The wife of deceased Banarasi Das and others were taking him to Banka Sadar Hospital where he died. In his cross-examination, he has stated that prior to the occurrence, criminal case was pending against Banarasi Das (deceased). He did not know whether it was case of Dacoity or of 307 of the I.P.C. 8. P.Ws.2 and 3 are the seizure list witnesses and they have been declared hostile. P.W.4 is a formal witness. P.W.5, P.W.8, P.W.11 and P.W.14 have been tendered. 9. P.W.6 is the medical officer in Sub-divisional Hospital, Banka who has held the autopsy on the dead body of Banarsi Das on 27.09.1988 at 3 PM and found the following ante-mortem injuries : (i) One lacerated bleeding wound on back (level T6-T12) size 4” x 3” x bone deep. There was some metal particles Blade and Kanti in the wound. Thoracic vertebra (T6-T10) fragmented. (ii) One abrasion on left knee joint size 2” x 1”. The injury no. (i) was caused by some explosive & injury no. (ii) was caused by some hard and rough substance. The cause of death is due to haemorrhage and shock from injury no. (i). The time since death was within 12 hours. Thoracic vertebra (T6-T10) fragmented. (ii) One abrasion on left knee joint size 2” x 1”. The injury no. (i) was caused by some explosive & injury no. (ii) was caused by some hard and rough substance. The cause of death is due to haemorrhage and shock from injury no. (i). The time since death was within 12 hours. The following materials were preserved for Forensic Test : (i) Some metal particles. (ii) Kanti. (iii) Blade. The post mortem examination report has been marked as Ext.1. In his cross-examination, he has stated that by bomb injury may be caused, may not be caused. It depends upon the type of bomb and distance from which it has been used. 10. P.W.7 is the informant and wife of the deceased. She has stated that on 27.09.1988 at 9.15 A.M. there was occurrence. After taking meal, she (P.W.7), her husband Banarasi Das (deceased) and her niece Madhu Kumari (P.W.14) were going to Banka Bazar to purchase clothes. When they reached near the field of Umesh Jha at Vijay Nagar, accused Anod Das (appellant), Khedan Das, Ashok Das, Anirudh Das, Sikandar Das of her village (Vijay Nagar) stood up and began to abuse her husband. Accused Khedan Das and Ashok Das threshed her husband. Anod Das (appellant) instigated the co-accused to kill him. Sikandar Das and Anirudh Das were carrying bag. Her husband could not free himself from the clutch of the accused. She raised alarm. Anod Das took out bomb from the bag of Sikandar Das and exploded it on the back of her husband which caused him injury. On raising alarm, Sumitra Devi (P.W.12), Umesh Das (P.W.9), Sahdeo Das (P.W.11) and others came there. Khedan Das and Ashok Das shot fire which did not hit any one. Many co-villagers came there. The aforesaid five accused fled away. She has further stated that she and others put her husband on the Thela for taking to hospital. Kali Das (P.W.10), Sahdeo Das (P.W.11), Umesh Das (P.W.9) and Sumitra Devi (P.W.12) were accompanying. Banarsi Das told them that Anod Das (appellant) assaulted him. In the way to hospital, Banarsi Das became senseless. On reaching hospital, the doctor declared him dead. Thereafter, she went to the police station. Kali Das (P.W.10), Sahdeo Das (P.W.11), Umesh Das (P.W.9) and Sumitra Devi (P.W.12) were accompanying. Banarsi Das told them that Anod Das (appellant) assaulted him. In the way to hospital, Banarsi Das became senseless. On reaching hospital, the doctor declared him dead. Thereafter, she went to the police station. She has further stated that in the previous night, when she was returning with her husband after visiting movies at 10 PM, Rudo Das, Prasadi Das, Nunu Das, Kishan Das and two other persons were making conspiracy against her husband which has been executed on the fateful day. She narrated about the occurrence to the Officer I/c. After writing the contents thereof were read over and after finding it correct, she put her signature which was witnessed by P.W.9. The fardbeyan has been marked as Ext.2. She has stated that accused Anirudh died. She has identified Anod Das (appellant), Khedan Das, Ashok Das, Sikandar Das, Prasadi Das, Amrit Das, Binay Das who were present in the court. She has been cross-examined at length. It appears that she has been cross-examined at great length but the appellant has failed to demolish her evidence. 11. P.W.9 is the brother of the deceased. He has also supported the prosecution case as P.W.7 (informant). He has stated that the deceased, his wife and Madhu (daughter of P.W.9) were going together to the Banka market to purchase clothes. They were ahead and he was going behind. When the aforesaid persons reached near the field of Umesh Jha, Anod Das (appellant), Sikandar Das, Anirudh Das, Ashok Das and Khedan Das stood up. Khedan Das and Ashok Das thrashed his brother (deceased). Anod Das (appellant) took out bomb from the bag of Sikandar Das and exploded on the back of his brother Banarsi Das (deceased). P.W.7 raised alarm. Thereafter, Khedan Das took out pistol from the waist of Ashok Das and shot fire. People assembled. Thereafter, all the five accused fled towards eastern side. He and others lifted the injured Banarsi Das and took him to the hospital by Thela. The injured was conscious and he told that Anodia (Anod Das) assaulted him with bomb. He has identified all the accused in the court. He has stated that he had also gone to the police station where his Bhabhi (P.W.7) had given her fardbeyan which was witnessed by him. The injured was conscious and he told that Anodia (Anod Das) assaulted him with bomb. He has identified all the accused in the court. He has stated that he had also gone to the police station where his Bhabhi (P.W.7) had given her fardbeyan which was witnessed by him. He has also been cross-examined at length, but the appellant has failed to demolish his evidence. 12. P.W.10 has also supported the prosecution case as P.W.9. He has also stated that while the injured was being taken to the hospital stated that Anodia (appellant) assaulted him with bomb. The appellant has not been able to demolish his evidence in his cross-examination. 13. P.W.12 is the wife of P.W.10. She has also supported the prosecution case. She has stated that she saw that all the five accused including the appellant caught hold of the deceased. The accused Ashok Das and Khedan Das thrashed the deceased. Anod Das (appellant) took out bomb from the bag of Sikandar Das and exploded on the back of Banarsi (deceased). His wife (P.W.7) and niece (P.W.14) of Banarsi Das (deceased) raised alarm. Thereafter, Ashok Das taking out revolver from the waist of Khedan Das shot fire. While taking, the injured Banarsi told that Anodia (appellant) assaulted him with bomb. She has also been cross-examined, but the appellant has failed to demolish her evidence. 14. P.W.13 is the Senior Scientist in Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna. He has stated that on 17.11.1988, the seized material of Banka P.S. Case No.409/1988 dated 27.09.1988 was entrusted to him for investigation. On opening the same, three paper packets marked A, B and C were found. The paper packet marked A and B said to contain remnants of exploded bomb and the paper packet marked C said to contain bloodstain earth. The paper packet marked A contained two tin pieces having yellowish stains. The paper packet marked B containing some sand like substance. The result of examination is as follows : (i) Residues of sensitive explosive mixture of Arsenic Sulphide and Potassium Chlorate were detected in the washing of articles contained paper packet marked A described above. It was concluded that the contents of above described paper packet marked ‘A’ were remnants of exploded bomb containing prohibited sensitive explosive mixture of Arsenic, Sulphide and Potassium Chlorate. It was concluded that the contents of above described paper packet marked ‘A’ were remnants of exploded bomb containing prohibited sensitive explosive mixture of Arsenic, Sulphide and Potassium Chlorate. (ii) No explosive or its reside could be detected in the washing of article contained in paper packet marked ‘B’ described above. (iii) Report on other exhibit was said to be furnished separately. The report of Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna has been marked as Ext. 4. 15. Lal Babu, the Investigating Officer has been examined as Court Witness No.1. He has stated that during August-September, 1988, he was posted as S.I. of Police. He retired on 31.05.1989. He has registered Banka P.S. Case No.409/1988 lodged by Laxmi Devi (P.W.7). He has investigated the case, inspected the place of occurrence and prepared the inquest report of the dead body of Banarsi Das and sent it for post-mortem examination. From the place of occurrence, he seized the two pieces of tin and material like explosive substance, bloodstained soil and prepared the seizure list and the seized articles were sent for chemical examination in the Forensic Science Laboratory, Patna. He obtained the sanction order (Ext.6) from the District Magistrate. After the investigation, he took the statement of witnesses and after completing investigation, submitted charge-sheet. He has also been cross-examined at length. 16. It has been submitted on behalf of the appellant that after investigation, the police has submitted charge-sheet. Cognizance was taken. Thereafter, the case was committed to the court of sessions. 11 accused persons were put on trial. All the accused except the appellant have been acquitted on the basis of the same evidence. The appellant also deserves to be acquitted. 17. The learned counsel for the State has submitted that after careful scrutiny of the evidence, the learned trial court has held the appellant’s guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the I.P.C. and Section 4 (a) of the Explosive Substances Act and taking a lenient view, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and 10 years respectively and the sentences to run concurrently. He has further submitted that the prosecution evidence is constant and natural. The learned trial court has rightly passed the impugned judgment. No interference is required by this Court. 18. He has further submitted that the prosecution evidence is constant and natural. The learned trial court has rightly passed the impugned judgment. No interference is required by this Court. 18. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties and on perusal of the impugned judgment and the material on the record, it appears that the learned trial court has scrutinized the evidence carefully. P.W.7, P.W.9, P.W.10 and P.W.12 are the eye witnesses to the occurrence and they have fully supported the prosecution case. Their evidence has been corroborated by the medical evidence, post-mortem report (Ext.1) and the doctor (P.W.6) and also by the Forensic report (Ext.4) and P.W.13. Their evidence is quite natural and convincing. The appellant has failed to demolish their evidence. 19. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, we find and hold that the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence of the appellant needs no interference by this Court. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence is upheld. The appellant is on bail, his bail bond is cancelled. He is directed to surrender before the learned trial court within 30 days to serve out the sentence as passed by the learned trial court. The learned trial court is also directed to take effective steps against the appellant for taking him into custody for serving sentences. In the result, this appeal is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.