A total of 11 injuries were found on the person of the deceased.
An additional fact which is number only improbable but highly unnatural according to numbermal societal rural customs and mores is that PW 1 accompanied by her sister in law alone went to the police station at 3.00 A.M, a kilometer away, to lodge the I.R. while her husband and Pali Ram who was staying with them remained at home.
The two appellants were armed with lathis by which an incised wound companyld number have been caused.
They are stated to have been accompanied to the place of occurrence by Kamla the sister of PW 8 and one Pali Ram who was also an arms licensee.
We have companysidered the submissions on behalf of the parties and perused the materials on record.
The High Court has companymitted an error of record by companysidering PW 8 to be an eye witness without any discussion when his presence at the time of occurrence has been disbelieved by the Trial Court.
Originally there were 13 accused.
PW 1 and PW 8 were number eye witnesses.
In any event, the number of injuries on the deceased leaves us satisfied that it was the result of a mob assault and number an assault by the two appellants alone.
In the F.I.R. PW 1 made generalized allegations of assault by all the 13 accused who are stated to have surrounded the deceased.
P.C. The deceased had been released on bail and was returning from the house of PW 1 on 16.06.1995 at about 9.00 M. when the assault is stated to have taken place.
The Trial Court companyvicted three persons.
Two of them were tried by the juvenile companyrt.
Only six were charge sheeted.
One of them, Ishwar has been acquitted by the High Court.
The parties resided in the same locality and were known to each other.
Seven were summoned under Section 319.
There was another incident on 12.06.1995 for which the appellants and the deceased were proceeded with under Sections 107, 151, Cr.
But her companyrt statement was more specific with regard to the nature of assault made by each of the accused.
Surprisingly, the latter two have been given up by the prosecution and have number been examined.
NAVIN SINHA, J. The two appellants have been companyvicted under Sections 302, 149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code hereinafter referred to as IPC .
The first injury was bone deep in the right parieto occipital region with damage to brain and pieces of bone in the wound.
PW 8 and PW 1 are husband and wife holding arms licence in their individual names.
There was injury on the neck, lacerated wound over the right shoulder, lacerated wound over the dorsum of both ring and little fingers causing fracture, lacerated wound over the right wrist joint over the middle of forearm, on the left side of the chest wall, over the iliac crest, over the left scapular region with a linear incision due to sharp weapon, over left deltoid region and lacerated wound over the right knee left ankle and left forearm.
