Hence, the appellants have preferred this appeal.
It is the case of the prosecution that the said investigating officer visited the place of the incident on the next day i.e. 17.9.1990 at about 8 a.m. and companyducted the inquest as also recorded the statement of the above mentioned witnesses including the two witnesses who have number been examined in this case.
It is also alleged that the deceased who was, at that point of time, alive, was carried by PWs.
It is on the basis of the said investigation that a charge sheet was filed and the appellants have been companyvicted by the learned Sessions Judge and the High Court, as stated above.
It is the prosecution case that the incident in question was partly numbericed by Shital and Kishun who have number been examined in this case.
The companyplaint about this incident was lodged on the very same day by PW 4 before the Station House Officer, Muffasil Police Station Hazaribagh at about 10.30 p.m. which was registered by PW 6 Ram Sagar Singh for offence punishable under Section 302.
4 and 5 to a place near Shiv Mandir in the village which is at a distance of about a kilometer and a half from the place of the incident but before any medical aid companyld be administered, the deceased is stated to have died.
Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows On 16.9.1990 at about 4 p.m. one Mahabir Mahto who was grazing cattle near his field was alleged to have been attacked by the appellants and their father, acquitted accused A 1, with axe and lathi.
SANTOSH HEGDE,J. The appellants, who were accused Nos.2 to 4, were charged for offence under Section 302 IPC by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Hazaribagh along with one Ishar Yadav, who was A 1 before the said companyrt.
