JUDGMENT VINOD PRASAD, J. - Appellants who are tow real sibling brother two Akshay Kumar Sahu (A-1) and Abhya Sahu (A-2) and son of (A-1) namely Pradeep Kumar Sahu (A-3) have been convicted for offences u/s 302/34 and 341/34 I.P.C. and are sentenced to life imprisonment for the charge of murder with common intention while no separate sentence was passed against them for the second charge of wrongful restraint with common intention, imposed by Additional Sessions Judge, Angul, in Criminal Trial (Sessions) No. 171/2004/42/2004, State Versus Akshay Kumar Sahu, vide Criminal Trial No. 49 of 2004 from the Court S.D.J.M., Angul, corresponding to Police case No. 5 of 2004, relating to police station Chhendipada district Angul and hence they have preferred this appeal assailing their said conviction and sentence. 2.Slating down comprehensively, prosecution story as was inked in the FIR, trotted out during investigation and disgorged before the Sessions Court, would reveal that the informant, deceased and witnesses from the prosecution side and all the appellants are co-villagers being residents of village Ramachandrapur, under Chhendipada Police Station District Angul. Whereas (A-1) and (A-2) are real sibling brothers being sons of Ekadasia Sahu, (A-3) is the son of (A-1). Similarly Naresh Garanaik (deceased) and Ravindra Kumar Garnaik were sibling brothers. Dushmant Kumar Garnaik/PW-1 is the son of Ravindra Kumar Garnaik and nephew of the deceased. There was hostility between both the factions as the deceased had tried to pull Pravati Sahu/DW-1, daughter of (A-1), when she had gone to the river bank to attend nature’s call, six months prior to the present incident, which molestation attempt was taken to be temerity by the accused side and an animosity developed between both the factions. The deceased was threatened by the accused persons, and, being terrified, the deceased had left the village, but ten or fifteen days prior to his murder, he had returned to his native village. The deceased was threatened by the accused persons, and, being terrified, the deceased had left the village, but ten or fifteen days prior to his murder, he had returned to his native village. On the ill-fated incident day of his murder, i.e., 10.1.2004, at about 4.30.P.M., deceased was carrying manure in two bamboo baskets in his bullock cart from the village road and when he reached near the thrashing floor of appellant (A-1), all the accused obstructed and surrounded his bullock cart and pulled away bamboo baskets containing manure from behind because of which Naresh Garnaik, the deceased, fell down on the ground, as the cart tilted towards the back, Deceased tried to escape for life but he could sprint only ten or so paces, when he was assaulted as a result of which he fell down. The deceased then attempted to rise and save himself but he was against inflicted with injuries by (A-2) with Kodi/spde, (A-1) with an iron rod, and (A-3) with blunt side of a Tangia, as a result of which, he, the deceased, sustained as many as eleven external injuries on his body, became unconscious and squatted on the ground. Accused persons thereafter fled away from the incident spot. This incident was witnessed by Dushmant Kumar Garnaik/PW-1,Khageshwar Garnaik/PW-2, Pratap Kumar Garnaik/P.W.-3, Dolagovind Garnaik/PW-5 and many others. Initially, the injured deceased was lifted to Chhendipada Community Health Centre, where he was medically examined by Doctor Suresh Chandra Das/PW-6 at 5.30 P.M. but later on he was shifted to District Head Quarter Hospital, Angul, where same day in night at about 11 or 11.30 P.M. he lost the battle of his life and succumbed while under treatment. 3.FIR/Ext. 1, about the incident was lodged by PW3 at police station Chhendipada on 10.1.2004 at 6. P.M., which was registered by Prakash Chandra Pal/PW-7, O.I.C. of the said police station as case No. 5 of 2004, who also drew formal FIR Ext. 1/3. PW-7 immediately set a foot the investigation, examined the informant, came to the incident scene and sketched spot map/Ext. 7. Albeit, injured Naresh was already under treatment in Chhendipada Community Health Centre, prior to the commencement of the investigation, yet the I.O. prepared requisition for his medical examination, vide Ext. 5/2. While inspecting spot, PW-7 had also seized weapons of assault in the presence of witnesses vide seizure memo Ext. 3. 7. Albeit, injured Naresh was already under treatment in Chhendipada Community Health Centre, prior to the commencement of the investigation, yet the I.O. prepared requisition for his medical examination, vide Ext. 5/2. While inspecting spot, PW-7 had also seized weapons of assault in the presence of witnesses vide seizure memo Ext. 3. Spage and Tangia are material Exts. M.O. I & II. After demise of the deceased crime was converted u/s 302/34 I.P.C.. and inquest over the cadaver of the deceased was performed and his inquest report Ext. 2 was inked by this witness, subsequent to which the cadaver of the deceased was dispatched for conducting autopsy. After post mortem examination, wearing apparels of the deceased were seized by this witness vide Ext. 8, Attires consisted of one torn Gunjee, Sambalpuri Gamacha, a full shirt, and a Khurda Gamucha, all stained with blood, which were exhibited as M.Os. III to IV. Accused persons were arrested thereafter and their clothes, M.Os. VII to IX, were seized vide Ext. 9. All the seized cloths were dispatched for chemical examination to Forensic Science laboratory, Rasulgarh through S.D.J.M. Angul. Forwarding report in the respect is Ext. 10. Report by Forensic Science Laboratory dated 28.5.2004, is Ext. 11 and serologist report dated 15.5.2004 is Ext. 12. Concluding investigation, I.O./PW-7 charge sheeted all the accused appellants for offences slated herein above. 4.First medical aid to the injured Naresh Garnaik, who was in a state of shock and whose condition was critical, was provided by, Dr. Suresh Chandra Das/PW-6, Medical officer, Chhedinapada Community Health Centre, on 10.1.2004 at 5.30 p.m. Doctor had noted following bleeding injures to have been sustained by the injured Naresh Gadnaik:- 1. Incised wound with regular margins on right temporal region of two inch length above and behind right ear with bleeding. 2. Multiple injury over left and right eye-brows irregular in size. 3. Lacerated injury over left and right eye-brows irregular in size. 5.Subsequent to his first-aid, injured was referred for better management of his injuries to surgical ward Head Quarter Hospital, Angul. Medical examination report of the injured is Ext. 5. On the interrogatory by the I.O., PW6 had opined that the sharp cutting injuries sustained by the injured could have been inflicted by weapons like axe, spade and lacerated injuries could have been caused by blunt object like iron rod. Such an expert opinion by the doctor is Ext. 6. Medical examination report of the injured is Ext. 5. On the interrogatory by the I.O., PW6 had opined that the sharp cutting injuries sustained by the injured could have been inflicted by weapons like axe, spade and lacerated injuries could have been caused by blunt object like iron rod. Such an expert opinion by the doctor is Ext. 6. 6.Autopsy on deceased Naresh Gadnaik cadaver was conducted by Dr. Kishore Chandra Mahapatra/PW-4, Gynaecology Specialist, in District Head Quarter Hospital, Angul, at 3 p.m. on 11.1.2004 and the doctor had found that the deceased was stoutly built, rigor mortis was present all over his both the limbs, his eyes were closed, mouth open and fist closed. Following ante mortem injures were sustained by the deceased:- i. Incised looking wound on right temporo parietal area of size 2" long 4" above right ear. ii. Incised looking wound of size 4" long transversely placed 2" above the glabella. iii. Lacerated wound of size 3" x 1" on occipital area 4" above and behind left ear. iv. Lacerated wound of size 2" long on occipital area 1" above occiput. v. Lacerated wound of size 3" long on left occipito temporal area. vi. Lacerated wound 1" long on left eye brow. vii. Contusion of size ½” x ½” on left cheek. viii. Lacerated wound of size ½” x 1” on right side of the face and 1/2” away from lateral cantaus of right eye. ix. Lacerated wound ½” long at base of dorsal aspect of middle finger of right hand. x. Contusion of size 1" x 1" on left side of chin. xi. Contusion of size 2" x 2" at inferior angle left scapula. 7.Internal examination revealed that menings and brain matter were injured at injury sites 1 and 2 and bones at both the sites were fractured. Other body organs were pale and heart and great vessels, though intact, but were empty. Death had occasioned due to shock to vital organs and bleeding and 12 to 24 hours had lapsed since the deceased had expires. Sustained injuries by the deceased were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. Post Mortem examination report has been proved as Ext. 4. Tangia/M.O. II could cause injuries 1 and 2 and other injuries could have been inflicted by blunt side of spade/M.O. I, or iron rod or of axe. Sustained injuries by the deceased were sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. Post Mortem examination report has been proved as Ext. 4. Tangia/M.O. II could cause injuries 1 and 2 and other injuries could have been inflicted by blunt side of spade/M.O. I, or iron rod or of axe. 8.Accused appellants, on the basis of submitted charges sheet, were summoned by committal Court of S.D.J.M., Angul, in the registered Criminal Trial Case No. 49 of 2004, State versus Akshya Kumar Sahu and others, and in due course, after observing necessary legal formalities, their case was sent up for trial before the Sessions Court. 9.Additional Sessions Judge, Angul, charged the accused with offences U/Ss 341/34,294/34,302/34 I.P.C. on 19.8.2004 and since all the accused denied those charges, pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried, that their prosecution commenced. 10.Hankered by success, prosecution, during the trial, rested its case by orally examining in all seven witnesses, out of whom, Dushmant Garnaik/PW-1, Ghageshwar Garnaik/PW-2 Pratap Kumar Garnaik PW 3 and Dolagovind Garnaik are fact witnesses. Autopsy Doctor Kishore Chandra Mahapatra is PW-4 and doctor Suresh Chandra Das, who had provided medical aid to the injured/deceased is PW-6. Prakash Chandra Pal, the I.O. of the crime is PW-7. 11.Accused appellants in their defence abjured all incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution evidences and they came out with a defence version that, in fact, on the date, time and place of the incident, the bullock cart plied by the deceased Naresh, in which he was carrying manure, got over turned, in which accident Naresh sustained injuries and albeit he was carried to the hospital he could not be saved and appellants have been falsely implicated in the crime due to previous enmity. In support of their version accused appellants had examined Pravati Sahu, daughter of (A-1) as a defence witness/DW-1. 12. Learned trial Court, on the basis of material evidences placed before him, both oral and documentary, returned a verdict of being guilty against all the accused appellants, for charges u/s 302/34 and 341/34 and hence convicted and sentenced them as above, by the impugned judgment and order, and hence this appeal challenging the said judgment and order. 12. Learned trial Court, on the basis of material evidences placed before him, both oral and documentary, returned a verdict of being guilty against all the accused appellants, for charges u/s 302/34 and 341/34 and hence convicted and sentenced them as above, by the impugned judgment and order, and hence this appeal challenging the said judgment and order. 13.In the background of above narrated facts, that we have heard Smt. Bharti Dash, learned counsel for the appellant and Sri J. Katkia, learned AGA for the respondent State and have vetted through the trial Court record and have analytically scanned evidences led in the trial. 14.Assailing impugned judgment, it is harangued by appellant’s counsel that the prosecution has failed to establish the charge against the appellants. Medical evidence does not support eye witness account and just to reconcile its case with both the evidences that the prosecution witnesses expatiated and articulated their testimonies by deposing that blunt side of sharp edged weapon was used to assault the deceased. If such a fact was true, there was no occasion for the witnesses not to disclose it before the I.O. and in the FIR/Ext. 1. 15.It was urged that the prosecution story is not credible in as much as it is puerile to cogitate that the assailants will throw away their respective weapons of assault at the spot to create evidence against themselves. No blood has been recovered from the spot and thereby scene of the incident is also not fixed which creates a doubt in the genuineness of the prosecution version. 16.Additionally, it was submitted that no seizure witness regarding any of the weapon of assault and attires or clothes of the appellants and the deceased was examined nor any independent witness was associated with such recoveries, thereby throwing the seizure by the Investigating Officer, in the realm of suspicion. It is further submitted that none of the fact witnesses including the informant was present at the spot nor they had seen the incident. 17.On an overall assessment, since the defence story is equally compatible with that of the prosecution, it is urged by appellants counsel, that the appeal of the appellant be allowed and their recorded conviction and sentence by the impugned judgment and order by scored out and they be acquitted of the charges framed against them. 17.On an overall assessment, since the defence story is equally compatible with that of the prosecution, it is urged by appellants counsel, that the appeal of the appellant be allowed and their recorded conviction and sentence by the impugned judgment and order by scored out and they be acquitted of the charges framed against them. 18.Per contra, learned Additional Government Advocate submitted that defence itself has admitted important and pivotal issues regarding the crime and, therefore, there is no occasion to disbelieve prosecution witnesses, medical evidence is consistent with the ocular testimony without any discrepancy or any damaging evidence toughing the core issues and, therefore, all the fact witnesses are reliable, trustworthy and truthful and there is total absence of any reasons to discard their testimony. Crime against the appellants is too well established so as not to be concurred. Appeal of the appellants sans merits and be dismissed is the ultimate epilogue of the learned Additional Government Advocate. We have pondered over rival submissions and have critically scanned the record in that light. From the record it emerges that so far as date, time and place of the incident is concerned, none of the appellants has seriously disputed the same. To none of the fact witness, any suggestion has been given creating a doubt on such all significant aspects of the incident. Both the sides are residents of the same village and hence, were very well known to each other. Consequently, it cannot be a case of mistaken identity. Besides that, we find that at least, PW-3 Pratap Kumar Garnaik is the maternal nephew of accused (A-1). In paragraph -9 of his deposition, which is a part of his cross-examination, he has clearly stated that “Accused Akshya is my maternal uncle”. In view of the aforesaid statement, it cannot be doubted that some of the witnesses examined by the prosecution were even related to the accused and they had no occasion or any viable reason to depose falsehood against the appellants. Furthermore, we find that since the date, time and place of the incident is admitted, the only thing which is to be scanned and adjudicated is as to whether the prosecution story of an assault on the deceased by the appellants is true or not? Furthermore, we find that since the date, time and place of the incident is admitted, the only thing which is to be scanned and adjudicated is as to whether the prosecution story of an assault on the deceased by the appellants is true or not? 19.Examining the said aspect, it is fathomed out from the evidence of P.W.1 that the incident had occurred at 4.30 P.M. on village road of Ramchandrapur. All the three appellants along with their respective weapons have been named by this witness. No suggestion was given to him that he had any reason to depose falsely. Merely because he is the nephew of the deceased, his evidence or the testimony, which is otherwise reliable and trustworthy, cannot be discarded. It is too well settled trite law that relatives will be the last persons to exonerate real culprits and frame an innocent person and foist a false case against them. Entire cross-examination of PW-1 is circled around on insignificant trivial aspects of topography etc. which does not cast any doubt on the genuineness of the prosecution version. Evidence ofPW-1 is well corroborated by other fact witnesses, PW-2 PW-3 and PW-5. Each of these witnesses have narrated that it were the appellants who had stopped the bullock cart of the deceased in which the deceased was carrying manure in bamboo baskets. The bamboo baskets was pulled down from the back and therefore, the deceased fell on the ground, who then tried to escape from the incident spot, but could tramp only 10 or 15 pieces and interregnum he was inflicted with injury. Sustaining the assault injury, he has fallen on the ground. He, even thereafter, tried to escape and save his life, but failed in that attempt. All the appellants with their respective weapons, thereafter, assaulted him. Such a version which is well corroborated by all the fact witnesses which had occurred in daylight, cannot be doubted at all. 20.In view of aforesaid, we find that prosecution has successfully established the participation of the appellants in the crime in which the deceased was inflicted with fatal injuries because of which that very night, while under treatment in the District Hospital, the deceased expired. We, therefore, find criticism by appellants’ counsel to be trivial and, therefore, discard it outright. 21.Coming to the seizure, etc. We, therefore, find criticism by appellants’ counsel to be trivial and, therefore, discard it outright. 21.Coming to the seizure, etc. and non-examination of any independent witnesses regarding that, we are of the opinion that since the appellants themselves have not disputed or challenged the date, time and place of the incident, non-production of any independent witnesses in respect of seizure and recovery made by the Investigating Officer is not going to damage the prosecution case or prove otherwise. It is the defence plea itself that the bullock cart had overturned at the spot of the incident on the date, time and place because of which the deceased had sustained injury. Hence, it is also established from the defence plea itself the deceased was coming along with a bullock cart in which he was transporting manure in tow bamboo baskets. Thus, major part of the prosecution story has been admitted by the appellants themselves which, gives an impetus and authentication to the prosecution version. Medical report of the deceased, as has already mentioned hereinabove, unerringly indicates that deceased had sustained injures both by sharp edged weapon as well as blunt object. At this stage, we would like to advert to the castigation that if the accused had an intention to commit murder, why they will use the blunt side to assault the deceased. In our estimation, such a snipping is facetious. What was working in the minds of the accused, only he can divulge. Two vital injuries sustained by the deceased which was injury No. 1 and 2 definitely were caused by an axe and a spade, and, therefore, the assailants had a common intention of committing murder of the deceased. They had enough of motive as the daughter of A-1, who had gone to attend nature’s call near the river in the morning was admitted to be molested by the deceased for which a village conclave was also convened in which the deceased had not participated but the village conclave pronounced him guilty. It seems that after that episode, the deceased had left the village to reside at the place to save his skin and only his death call brought him to the incident village. 22.Coming to the evidence of defence witness, we find that she had tried to save her father, uncle and brother from jail, but she had miserably failed. It seems that after that episode, the deceased had left the village to reside at the place to save his skin and only his death call brought him to the incident village. 22.Coming to the evidence of defence witness, we find that she had tried to save her father, uncle and brother from jail, but she had miserably failed. She has no personal knowledge about the incident and her evidence concerning the motive for annihilation of the deceased only establishes prosecution charge. 23.In ultimate outcome, our epilogue is that the appeal filed by the appellants sans merit, and therefore, conviction and sentence recorded through the impugned judgment and order is well founded and, therefore, there is no reason to take a contrary view than what has been taken by the learned trial Judge. 24.Wrapping up, the appeal stands dismissed and conviction and sentence of all the three appellants through impugned judgment and order stands confirmed. Appellant Pradeep Kumar Sahu (A-3) is in jail. He shall remain in jail to serve out remaining part of his .. sentence. Rest of the two appellants Askhaya Kumar Sahu (A-1) and Abhay Kumar Sahu (A-2) are on bail. Their personal bonds as well as surety bonds are cancelled and they are directed to be taken into custody forthwith to serve out remaining part of their sentences. Appeal is dismissed. 25.Let the trial Judge and the Jail Superintendent be informed accordingly. Appeal dismissed.