JUDGMENT : 1. Heard Mr. Mohit Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the appellant(s) and Ms. Nehala Sharmin, learned Spl.P.P. 2. The aforesaid appeals arise out of the same impugned judgment of conviction and order of sentence. Accordingly, both these appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment. The appellants Gauri Shankar Nath Tiwary and Ashok Kumar Tiwary [In Cr. Appeal D.B. No. 116 of 1995 (R)] and appellants Manoj Mishra @ Manoj Kr. Mishra, Ramdayal Mishra, Bhudeo Mishra and Rajnath Mishra [In Cr. Appeal D.B. No. 117 of 1995 (R)] have filed these appeals against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 16.08.1995 (sentence passed on 18.08.1995), passed by Sri Rameshwar Prasad Verma, learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Gumla in S.T. No. 45 of 1994, arising out of G. R. Case No. 643 of 1993, Corresponding to Gumla P.S. Case No. 164 of 1993, holding the appellants guilty of offences under Sections 302/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and thereby sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for each of the offence under Section 302/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently during the pendency of the aforesaid appeals, the appellant no. 2 Ashok Kumar Tiwary [Cr. Appeal D.B. No. 116 of 1995 (R)] died and as such [Cr. Appeal D.B. No. 116 of 1995 (R)] stood abated against him. It further transpires that the appellant no. 3 Bhudeo Mishra and appellant no. 4, Rajnath Mishra [In Cr. Appeal D.B. No. 117 of 1995 (R)] have also died and as such [Cr. Appeal D.B. No. 117 of 1995 (R)] also stood abated against them. 3. The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of fardbeyan of the informant Satish Nath Tiwary alleging therein that on 22.08.1993 at about 08:00 P.M., cousin of the informant came to his house and informed him that his father Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari was lying in an injured condition near Madarsa Pond. On receiving this information, he along with other villagers rushed to the place of occurrence. He saw that his father was lying injured with three injuries on his head. He was bleeding profusely. The injured was taken to Sadar Hospital, Gumla. The doctors there advised him to take him to Ranchi for better treatment. On the way to Ranchi, the father of the informant succumbed to his injuries. He saw that his father was lying injured with three injuries on his head. He was bleeding profusely. The injured was taken to Sadar Hospital, Gumla. The doctors there advised him to take him to Ranchi for better treatment. On the way to Ranchi, the father of the informant succumbed to his injuries. Suspicion has been raised that unknown person had committed the murder of the deceased by sharp cutting weapon. 4. After investigation, police found the occurrence to be true and submitted charge-sheet under sections 341/ 326/ 307/302 /120B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The cognizance of the case was taken by the learned C.J.M, Gumla under the aforesaid sections. This case was committed to the court of sessions by Sri B.P. Singh, learned J.M.F.C on 05.02.1994 as it was exclusively triable by a court of sessions. 5. Charge was framed against the appellants on 22nd February 1994 under Sections 302/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The contents of the charge were read over and explained to them in Hindi to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has adduced both oral and documentary evidence. 7. Dr. Prabhakar Marandi P.W.1 is a hearsay witness. On information, he went to the place of occurrence and saw the deceased lying in an injured condition. Baratu Mian P.W.2 is another hearsay witness. Deo Prasad Tiwary P.W.3 is a witness of seizure he has proved his signature on three seizure lists which were marked as Ext.-1 series. Md. Shamshad P.W.4 is another hearsay witness who went to the place of occurrence and saw the deceased lying in an injured condition. Sher Khan P.W.5 is a tendered witness. Ramji Prasad Sahu P.W.6. has stated that appellant Rajnath Mishra had the motive to murder the deceased as the deceased wanted to remove him from the priesthood of the village temple. Girwar Lal Sahu P.W.7 has stated that appellant Rajnath Mishra had the motive to murder the deceased as the deceased wanted to remove him from the priesthood of the village temple. Mishri Prasad P.W.8 has been declared hostile. Narmadeshwar Prasad P.W.9 is another hostile witness. Sudhir Kumar Shukla P.W.10 has stated that the deceased appellant Ashok Kumar Tiwari had the motive to murder the deceased as he wanted to become his political successor. Mishri Prasad P.W.8 has been declared hostile. Narmadeshwar Prasad P.W.9 is another hostile witness. Sudhir Kumar Shukla P.W.10 has stated that the deceased appellant Ashok Kumar Tiwari had the motive to murder the deceased as he wanted to become his political successor. Binod Prasad Singh P.W.11 is the judicial magistrate who has recorded the statement of the witnesses under section 164 Cr.P.C. he has proved their statement which are Ext.-2 series. Umesh Nath Tiwary P.W.12 is son of the deceased. He has stated about the motive of the appellants in committing the murder of the deceased. He has stated that Ashok Kumar Tiwari wanted to be the political successor of his father and he was keeping a watch on the movements of his father since last few days. He has further stated that his father wanted to remove the appellant Rajnath Mishra from the priesthood of the village temple as he had embezzled the temple funds, he has further stated that 04-5 years prior to the date of occurrence the appellant Bhudeo Mishra has misbehaved with a girl child due to which he was excommunicated from the village by his father. Gopal Prasad Sahu P.W.13 is a hostile witness. Baldeo Prasad Sahu P.W.14 has stated that the appellant Rajnath Mishra had the motive to murder the deceased as the deceased wanted to remove him from the priesthood of local temple because he had embezzled the temple funds. Umesh Nath Tiwari P.W. 12 is the son of the deceased Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari and he has stated that the appellant Rajnath Mishra had the motive to murder the deceased as he had embezzled the temple funds and his father wanted to remove him from the priesthood of the temple. He has further stated that the appellant Bhudeo Mishra and the appellant Ramdayal Mishra had misbehaved with a local girl in the village temple due to which they were asked to leave the temple premises. He has further stated that the appellant Ashok Tiwari wanted to be the political successor of his father and he was keeping a watch on the whereabouts of his father since last few days. Md. Khurshid Alam P.W.16 is a hearsay witness. On coming to know about the occurrence, he went to the place of occurrence and found the deceased lying there in an injured condition. Md. Khurshid Alam P.W.16 is a hearsay witness. On coming to know about the occurrence, he went to the place of occurrence and found the deceased lying there in an injured condition. Bigan Prasad P.W.17 has not supported the prosecution case, though he has not been declared hostile, but the prosecution was permitted to cross-examine him. Bihari Prasad Sahu P.W.18 has not supported the prosecution case, he has also not been declared hostile and the prosecution was permitted to cross examine him. Bhairo Prasad P.W.19 is a hostile witness. Md. Salim Ansari P.W.20 is a witness of seizure list of blood stained soil. He has proved his signature and that of the appellant Ashok Kumar Tiwari on the seizure list which are Ext.-1 series. Bablu @ Taufiq Alam P.W. 21 has been declared hostile. Jagarnath Sao P.W.22 has stated that the appellant Rajnath Mishra had the motive to murder the deceased as he had embezzled the temple funds. A meeting was called for in the afternoon to remove him from the priesthood but as the deceased could not participate, no decision was taken. Satish Nath Tiwari P.W.23 has stated about the motive of the appellants in committing murder of the deceased. He has stated that the appellant Bhudeo Mishra and Ramdayal Mishra has misbehaved with the village girl in the temple due to which they were externed from the temple premises. He has further stated that the appellant Ashok Kumar Tiwari wanted to be political successor of his father. He has further stated that the appellant Rajnath Mishra and his sons had given an application before the circle officer to enter their name with regard to the land trusted with the temple in the revenue records. He has further proved his signature on the fardbeyan which is Ext.-1/w. Saroj Srivastava P.W.24 is Circle Officer, Gumla, has proved the application filed by Rajnath Mishra, the appellant Bhudeo Mishra and Ramdayal Mishra in Circle Office for entering their name in the revenue records with regard to the land which was trusted with the temple for which revenue case no. 231/93-94 was instituted. He has stated that the investigating officer of the case has seized the records prior to the seizure list and he has signed the seizure list. Dr. Ram Sevak Sahu P.W. 25 is the doctor who had performed the post-mortem on the dead body of the deceased. 231/93-94 was instituted. He has stated that the investigating officer of the case has seized the records prior to the seizure list and he has signed the seizure list. Dr. Ram Sevak Sahu P.W. 25 is the doctor who had performed the post-mortem on the dead body of the deceased. He has proved the post mortem report which is Ext.-4. Arvind Kumar Sinha P.W.26 is investigating officer of this case he has proved the place of occurrence. He has proved the dagger which was used in committing murder of the deceased which was marked as Material Ext.-1. He has also proved various seizure lists which are Ext.-7 series. 8. Statements of the appellants were recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Defence is general denial of the occurrence and false implication. 9. Mr. Mohit Prakash, learned lawyer appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that there is no evidence against the appellants to prove that they had committed the murder of the deceased Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari, he further submitted that the appellants have been convicted only on the ground that they had the motive to commit murder of the deceased. He further submitted that the motive for committing the murder of the deceased for each of the appellants was different. He finally submitted that the appellants were neither last seen with the deceased nor any incriminating material fact was discovered. On these grounds it was prayed that this appeal be allowed and appellants be acquitted of the charge. 10. Ms. Nehala Sharmin, learned special P.P. has submitted that the appellants had a strong motive to commit the murder of the deceased. It was further submitted that the prosecution had been able to prove its case against the appellants beyond all reasonable doubt. 11 Now it has to be ascertained that whether the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt. 12. In order to come to the aforesaid finding it has to be ascertained (i) Whether the deceased Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari died a homicidal death? (ii) Whether the appellants had caused the homicidal death of the deceased Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased Braj Kishor Nath Tiwari died a homicidal death. 12. In order to come to the aforesaid finding it has to be ascertained (i) Whether the deceased Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari died a homicidal death? (ii) Whether the appellants had caused the homicidal death of the deceased Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari. It is the case of the prosecution that the deceased Braj Kishor Nath Tiwari died a homicidal death. Md Shamshad P.W.4 has stated that on being informed that Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari was lying near the village pond, he went there and saw injury on the head of the deceased. Umesh Nath Tiwary P.W.12 has stated that he saw three incised injuries on the head of his father late Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari. He saw that blood was oozing from the injuries. Satish Nath Tiwari P.W. 23 is another son of the deceased. He has stated that on being informed by Gauri shankar Nath Tiwari that his father was lying near Madarsa Talab, he went to the place of occurrence and saw that blood was oozing from the head of his father. The prosecution has not adduced the inquest report in evidence. Dr. Ram Sevak Sahu P.W.25 has performed the postmortem on the dead body of the deceased. He found the following injuries on his person. (i) Abrasions 1x ½ cm on right upper part lateral side. (ii) Abrasion 2X ¼ cm on left knee lateral side. (iii) Incised stitched wound no. (A) 14X1 cm into bone deep on right temporal parietal region of head cutting the right pinna underlying bone meninges and the brain matter with presence of blood and blood clots in the cranial cavity;s 20X2 cm size X bone deep on right occipital parietal region of head cutting the underlying bone meninges and brain matter having presence of blood and blood clots in the cranial cavity and 4X1 cm X bone deep on the right parietal region of head cutting underlying bone. These injuries at the time of postmortem were found stitched. Further unstitched incised wound of 6X1 cm X soft tissues; secondly, 4X1 cm X soft tissue and thirdly 5X1 cm X3 were also found. According to this witness all the above aforementioned injuries were antemortem in nature abrasions were caused by hard and blunt substance and the rest by heavy sharp weapon. Death was caused due to head injury. 13. Further unstitched incised wound of 6X1 cm X soft tissues; secondly, 4X1 cm X soft tissue and thirdly 5X1 cm X3 were also found. According to this witness all the above aforementioned injuries were antemortem in nature abrasions were caused by hard and blunt substance and the rest by heavy sharp weapon. Death was caused due to head injury. 13. From the perusal of the postmortem report, it appears that the findings of Dr. Ram Sevak Sahu regarding the injury sustained by the deceased and the nature of the injuries and cause of death fully corroborates his oral testimony made during the trial. 14. From the aforesaid oral and documentary evidence, we come to a finding that the deceased Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari died due to injuries, which were neither self-inflicted nor accidental but were homicidal in nature. Accordingly, the prosecution has been able to prove that the deceased Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari died a homicidal death. 15. It is further the case of the prosecution that the appellants Gauri Shankar Nath Tiwary, Ashok Kumar Tiwary, Manoj Mishra, Ramdayal Mishra, Bhudeo Mishra has caused death of the deceased. There is no eye witness to the occurrence nor any incriminating articles have been recovered on the basis of confession of the appellants. The appellants were also not last seen with the deceased. 16. The prosecution witnesses had attributed motive on the appellants as all of these appellants had motive to commit the murder of the deceased Braj Kishore Nath Tiwari, according to Ramji Prasad Sahu P.W.6, Girwar Lal Sahu P.W.7, Binod Prasad Singh P.W.11, Baldeo Prasad Sahu P.W.14 and Jagarnath Sao P.W. 22. have stated that the appellant Rajnath Mishra had the motive to murder the deceased as he wanted to remove him from the priesthood of the village Temple. Umesh Nath Tiwary P.W.12 has stated that the appellant Ashok Kumar Tiwari wanted to be political successor of his father and he was keeping watch on his movement since last few days. He has further stated that the appellant had misbehaved with a girl child due to which he was excommunicated from the village by his father. Baldeo Prasad Sahu P.W.14, has stated that the appellant Ramdayal Mishra had misbehaved with a village girl due to which he was asked to leave the temple. He has further stated that the appellant had misbehaved with a girl child due to which he was excommunicated from the village by his father. Baldeo Prasad Sahu P.W.14, has stated that the appellant Ramdayal Mishra had misbehaved with a village girl due to which he was asked to leave the temple. As the appellant wanted to be political successor of his father and he was keeping a watch on the movements of his father since last few days. Jagarnath Sao P.W. 22 has stated that the appellant Rajnath Mishra had the motive to murder the deceased. As he had embezzled the temple funds. A meeting was also called for in the afternoon, to remove him from the priesthood of the village. But as the deceased could not participate in the meeting no decision was taken. Satish Nath Tiwari P.W. 23 has stated that appellants Bhudeo Mishra and Ramdayal Mishra, both had misbehaved with a village girl in the temple due to which they were externed from the temple premises. He has further stated that the appellant Ashok Kumar Tiwari wanted to be political successor of his father. The appellant Rajnath Mishra and his sons had given an application before the Circle Officer to enter their name in the revenue records with regard to the lands trusted with the temple. 17. From the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case, it is apparent that the only material available against the appellants is that all had different motives to commit murder of the deceased. Motive, however strong cannot be basis of holding a person guilty of murder. Unless there is other corroborative evidence. 18. In view of the aforesaid facts; we come to a finding that the learned Trial Court had wrongly come to a finding regarding the guilt of the appellants for the offence under sections 302/ 34/120-B of the Indian Penal Code. 19. These appeals are allowed. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Trial Court is set aside. 20. Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.