JUDGMENT : B.B. Mangalmurti, J. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State. 2. The sole appellant is aggrieved by the impugned Judgment of conviction dated 22.05.2006 and Order of sentence dated 24.05.2006, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Sahibganj in Sessions Case No. 45(A) of 1993/T.R. No.35 of 2004, whereby, the appellant has been found guilty and convicted for the offences under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code. Upon hearing on the point of sentence, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for each of the offences under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is based on the fardbeyan of the informant Sanjhali Soren recorded by Ramdeo Prasad, Officer-in-Charge, Borio Mirzachowki P.S. on 03.11.1981 at 7 p.m. that her father Pairu Soren possessed 25 Bigha of land in village Dayalpur and Karla Bandh and paddy crops was sown by her father in the said field. On 03.11.1981 at about 10.00 a.m., the informant Sanjhali Soren along with her father Pairu Soren, mother Noha Hansda, her elder brother Baijnath Soren, her uncle Dhobo Soren, her aunt Sanjhali Murmu and co-villagers Day Baski, Dhena Murmu, Talka Murmu, Ragdu Baski, Basiya Soren, Dhotey Baski, Lengra Baski, Ludhu Baski and others came to the said field of her father for harvesting the paddy and they harvested the paddy crops of six kiyaries of mouza Karla Bandh and kept it on Bishanpur Pokhar in bundles and thereafter the informant and her companions were returning to harvest the paddy of two fields of village Bishanpur. Meanwhile, Santhals of village Dayalpur Jabdi Bhagouna (Pandariya) and muslims of village Bishanpur about hundred in number, armed with lathi, bhala, sabbal, axe, sickle, balbat, bow and arrow and forming an unlawful assembly surrounded the informant and her companions. Informant identified that Chunda Murmu was holding axe, Talang Baski with bhala, Sangram Marandi with sabbal, Bijay Soren with sickle, Baijal Hansda with balbat and Chunda Baski, Badam Murmu and Damku Tudu with lathi. All these accused persons surrounded the informant and her companions in the paddy field in the west side of village Dayalpur where there were two trees of khajoor. Accused Chunda Murmu inflicted injury on the head of Pairu Soren with axe. All these accused persons surrounded the informant and her companions in the paddy field in the west side of village Dayalpur where there were two trees of khajoor. Accused Chunda Murmu inflicted injury on the head of Pairu Soren with axe. Accused Talang Baski inflicted spear injury at the head of Noha Hansda (mother of informant), accused Chunda Baski, Sangram Marandi and Baijal Hansda caused injury to Baijnath Soren (brother of informant) by balbat and sabbal and accused Baijal Hansda and Bijay Soren inflicted injuries at the face and other parts of the body of her uncle Dhobo Soren with balbat and sickle causing murder of Pairu Soren, Noha Hansda, Baijnath Soren and Dhobo Soren. An arrow was pierced in the back of Basiya Soren. Further She stated that while accused persons were assaulting, her uncle Dhobo Soren, he entered in the house of Bare Mian of village Bishanpur to save himself but Bare Mian ousted him from the house. Her sister Manjhali Soren also got injury from Lathi. The occurrence took place at about 2 p.m. and the the land for which the accused persons committed the murder of her father and others and injured other persons was subject matter of litigation prior to the occurrence but her father was in possession of the said land and they were cultivating since before. On alarm many persons reached to the place of occurrence then accused persons fled away. Informant also stated that her other companions have identified remaining accused persons from their face as they are not aware from their names. On the basis of the fardbeyan, Borio (M) P.S. Case No. 135 of 1981 corresponding to G.R. No. 362 of 1982, was instituted for the offences under Sections 307/302/149 of the Indian Penal Code, against accused Chunda Marandi @ Chunda Murmu, Sangram Murmu @ Sangram Marandi, Bijal Hansda, Badam Hansda, Suray Hansda, Talan @ Tolang Baski @ Tudu, Bijay Soren @ Bijay Murmu, Chunda @ Chunka Baski and Dhebu Tudu and investigation was taken up. After investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet in the case. 4. After commitment of the case to the Court of Session, due to non-appearance of accused Bijay and Sangram, their cases were split up from the original case and trial proceeded only against sole accused Bijay Murmu @ Bijay Soren. After investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet in the case. 4. After commitment of the case to the Court of Session, due to non-appearance of accused Bijay and Sangram, their cases were split up from the original case and trial proceeded only against sole accused Bijay Murmu @ Bijay Soren. Charges were framed against the sole accused for the offences under Section 302/307/149 of the Indian Penal Code, and upon the accused’s pleading not guilty and claiming to be tried, he was put to trial. During trial eight witnesses were examined by the prosecution, including the I.O. and the Doctor, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased. 5. Out of the material witnesses examined, P.W.-1 Sanjhali Soren is informant of this case, P.W.2 Sanjhali Murmu wife of deceased, P.W.3- De Baski, P.W.4-Talka Murmu, P.W.5-Gumai Murmu, P.W.6- Dr. Jagdish Saha, P.W.7-Dr. Pramod Shanker Kashyap, who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased. 6. P.W.1 Sanjhali Soren is the informant of this case. She has stated that Chunda Murmu caused axe injury on the head of his father Pairu Soren causing his death, Talang Baski caused death of Noha Hansda by spear at her head, and Sangram Murmu and Bigal Hansda caused death of his brother Baijnath Soren by inflicting injury to him by iron rod and Sabbal. Bijay Soren and Chunka Hansda caused injury at the face and back of her uncle Dhebu Soren with Kachiya and Balbat. Pairu Soren, Noha Hansda, Baijnath Soren and Dhebu Soren were beaten to death and after their murder they dragged the crops towards the field situated at the western side. She has further stated that at the place of occurrence there were two trees of Khajoor. She has further stated that her sister Manjhali received the injury at her head by Lathi and her uncle Kashiya Soren received injury at his back by arrow. Officer Incharge (Barababu) of Mirzachowki P.S. came there and recorded her statement on which she put her L.T.I. on her fardbeyan before Narayan Mukhiya and Gumai Mukhiya of village Pindara. 7. P.W.2 Sanjhali Murmu is the wife of deceased Dheba Soren. She stated that she had gone to harvest the paddy crops with Noha Hansda, Pairu Soren, Baijnath Soren, Sanjhali Soren, Manjhali Soren, Basiya Soren and Dhobo Soren, Talka Murmu, De Baski, Luthu Baski, Dhena Murmu and others. 7. P.W.2 Sanjhali Murmu is the wife of deceased Dheba Soren. She stated that she had gone to harvest the paddy crops with Noha Hansda, Pairu Soren, Baijnath Soren, Sanjhali Soren, Manjhali Soren, Basiya Soren and Dhobo Soren, Talka Murmu, De Baski, Luthu Baski, Dhena Murmu and others. They harvested paddy crops of six fields and kept it on Bishanpur Bandh Pokhar in bundles and went further to harvest the paddy of Dayalpur. They harvested the paddy of two fields and while they were carrying bundles of paddy to the said Pokhar, meanwhile villagers of Dayalpur and muslims of Bishanpur appeared and surrounded them. Amongst them she identified Chunda Murmu with axe in his hand. Chunda inflicted injury at the head of Pairu Soren causing his death. Talang inflicted injury at the head of Noha due to which she died. Sangram inflicted injury on the head of Baijnath Soren by Sabbal causing his death. Her husband tried to save himself by entering into the house of one Bare Mian but Bare Mian ousted her husband Dhebo Soren then Bijay Soren @ Bijay Murmu inflicted injury on the mouth of Dhebo Soren by sickle and inflicted injury at his head with Balbat then Dhebo died. Manjhali Soren received injury on her head by Lathi, Baijal inflicted arrow injury to Basiya at her back. After the incident Basiya Soren and Manjhali Soren also died. 8. P.W.3 De Baski has fully supported the prosecution case and stated that Bijay Soren@ Bijay Murmu was one of the members of the mob who caused injury on the face of Dhobo Soren with Kachiya resulting to his death. 9. P.W.4 Talka Murmu also supported the prosecution case but after seeing the mob of accused persons he fled away to his house at Mehdi Pokhar. Lateron he came to know that Noha, Pairu, Baijnath and Dhebo has been murdered. 10. P.W.5 Gumai Murmu has stated that from Pradhan Patta Soren and Talang Tudu of village Dayalpur he received information that murder has taken place during harvesting of paddy crops in mouza Dayalpur and he went to the place of occurrence and Daroga came there and recorded the fardbeyan of daughter of Pairu who narrated the occurrence in Santhali language and same was translated by him in Hindi and then she put her L.T.I. on her fardbeyan and he also put his signature on the fardbeyan. The witness has proved fardbeyan as Ext.2 and his signature on the said fardbeyan as Ext.1 and signature of Narayan Murmu Pradhan as Ext.1/1. This witness has further stated that inquest report of four deceased were prepared on which he also signed. Blood stained soil and clothes of all the four dead bodies were seized by Daroga who prepared seizure list upon which Chhote Lal Kisku also signed. This witness also proved Inquest report of deceased as Ext.1/2 and seizure list of blood stained soil and clothes as Ext.1/3. 11. P.W.6 Dr. Jagdish Saha stated that at the relevant time he was posted as Medical Officer in State Dispensary, Borio. The post- mortem report of Baijnath Soren dated 05.11.1981 and post-mortem report of Pairu Soren and post- mortem report of Noha Hansda are in the pen and signature of Dr. U.S. Kashyap to which he identified as he had occasion to work with Dr. U.S. Kashyap, these PM reports are marked as Ext.3, Ext.4 and Ext.5 respectively. 12. P.W.7 Dr. Pramod Shanker Kashyap is the doctor who performed the post-mortem of deceased persons. He was posted as C.A.S. in Sub Divisional Hospital, Sahibganj and on 05.11.1981 he performed the post-mortem on the dead body of Baijnath Soren at 1 p.m. and found following injuries:- 1. Lacerated wound with depression on left temporal and frontal region 4”x2”x1”. 2. Lacerated wound 1’x1’ below left eye. 3. Laceration on the right ear. 4. Laceration on right temporal and occipital region. 5. Fracture of left temporal and frontal bone brain membrane was ruptured. Brain matter was out. He prepared the above post-mortem report in his handwriting and signature. It is marked as Ext.9. All these injuries are possible due to hard and blunt substance like back portion of axe or Dab or Lathi or Balbat and these injuries are sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death. This witness has further stated that he had also performed the post-mortem of the dead body of Pairu Soren at 11.30 a.m. and found following ante-mortem injuries:- 1. Lacerated wound with depression on the right temporal region 1”x1/2” and brain matter was out. 2. Lacerated wound 4”x2’x3” at the right side of maxilla and upper lip. 3. Lacerated wound on the right side above eye 2” x 1”. 4. Abrasion 3”x 1/2”x 1” below right eye. Lacerated wound with depression on the right temporal region 1”x1/2” and brain matter was out. 2. Lacerated wound 4”x2’x3” at the right side of maxilla and upper lip. 3. Lacerated wound on the right side above eye 2” x 1”. 4. Abrasion 3”x 1/2”x 1” below right eye. This post-mortem report is in his handwriting and signature to which he identified and the same was marked as Ext.10.In his opinion Death was due to brain injury and hemorrhage. Time elapsed since death was more than 72 hours and these injuries are possible due to hard and blunt substance like back portion of Balwat, Dav, Hasua, Kulhari and Sabbal. This witness has further stated that on the same day at about 12.00 noon he performed the post-mortem of dead body of Noha Hansda and found the following injuries:- 1. Lacerated wound 6”x 4”x 2” on the right side of temporal region. 2. Lacerated wound 2”x 1” on the right side post auricular region. 3. Abrasion on right side of the neck 1” in diameter. 4. Abrasion on front of chest 2”x 1/2". 5. Fracture of right temporal and occipital bone and maxilla on right side. This post-mortem report is also in his handwriting and signature to which he identified and marked as Ext.11. This witness has further stated that on the same day at about 12.00 noon he performed the post-mortem of dead body of Dhobo Soren and found the following ante-mortem injuries on his body:- 1. Lacerated wound with depression 3”x 2” x 2” at occipital region. 2. Fracture with laceration on left side maxilla 2”x 1”. 3. Left side cheek completely washed out. 4. Abrasion on back 6”x 4”x 4”. This post-mortem report is in his handwriting and signature to which he identified and marked as Ext.12. 13. P.W.8 Nakul Chandra Sah is a formal witness who has proved formal F.I.R. of this case in the handwriting and signature of the then Officer Incharge Borio (M) S.Ahmed which is marked as Ext.8. 14. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., wherein he has denied the evidence against him. The defence adduced one witness in this case. On the basis of the evidence on record, the sole appellant has been found guilty, and convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court below. 15. 14. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., wherein he has denied the evidence against him. The defence adduced one witness in this case. On the basis of the evidence on record, the sole appellant has been found guilty, and convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court below. 15. D.W.1 Harma Hansda stated that in the year 1982 in Mehdi Pokhar village four persons were murdered in the field of Chunda Marandi at village Dayalpur. He has further stated that this land belong to Chunda Marandi prior to 1982 and in the year 1982 Chunda cultivated the said land and sowed paddy crops and the accused persons came to loot the crop. He has further submitted that accused Bijay is resident of his neighbouring village and he has been falsely implicated in this case. This witness has no concern with the land but he was present there on the day of occurrence. 16. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence passed by the Trial Court below cannot be sustained in the eyes of law, in as much as, there are contradictions. The evidence of P.Ws.1, 2 and 3 are not in consonance with the F.I.R. As per the prosecution case in the F.I.R. Bijay and Baijal had made assaults by hasua and balbut, whereas in the evidences P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3 have narrated the different versions. Learned counsel further submitted that now the sole appellant is about 72 years old. It is a case of mob killing. She also submitted that manner of occurrence is also not proved as there are apparent contradictions. Lastly, she submitted that the Investigating Officer of this case has not been examined by the prosecution which caused prejudice to the convict. 17. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer and has submitted that PW-1 Sanjhali Soren, P.W.2 Sanjhali Murmu and P.W.3 De Baski, are the eye witnesses to the occurrence and they have fully supported the prosecution case. He further submitted that in prosecution of common object the occurrence took place causing murder of four persons. 18. He further submitted that in prosecution of common object the occurrence took place causing murder of four persons. 18. Having heard learned counsels for both the sides and upon going through the record, we find that it is a multi murder case in which informant side was cutting paddy from the field and while the process was going on, all of a sudden accused persons by forming unlawful assembly holding several kinds of weapon which was freely used for causing injuries to the informant side resulting to death of four persons. On scrutiny of the evidences brought on record by the prosecution as well as the defence, it appears that even if there are certain contradictions occurred while examining the witnesses, but they are not of much importance to weaken the prosecution version. The non-examination of the I.O. does not affect the prosecution case. There is specific evidence of assault upon the deceased against this appellant also. The medical report also support and corroborate the prosecution version. 19. On the basis of these materials on record and for the foregoing reasons, we do not find any illegality in the impugned Judgment of conviction dated 22.05.2006 and Order of sentence dated 24.05.2006, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Sahibganj in Sessions Case No. 45(A) of 1993/T.R. No.35 of 2004, convicting and sentencing the appellant Bijay Murmu @ Bijay Soren, for the offences under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 307/149 of the Indian Penal Code, which we hereby, affirm. The appellant Bijay Murmu @ Bijay Soren is already in custody undergoing the sentence. 20. We do not find any merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly, dismissed. Let the Lower Court Records be sent back to the Court concerned forthwith, along with a copy of this Judgment.