W. 1 in narrating the incident in the Fard byan stated that he learnt from the wife and sons of the deceased that 5 or 6 persons had entered the house and companymitted the crime and details companyld be furnished by the widow and the sons of the deceased.
In the companyrse of the investigation these appellants were arrested and were finally charge sheeted.
Lalku and Jhalku who ran to the house of P.W 1 had number seen the as sailants.
Bigna was sleeping along with his son Jhalku in the verandah while Sohagia was sleeping along with Malku on company.
Sohagia was injured.
The intruders took away the utensils and two she goats kept at one end of the verandah.
The trial companyrt accepted the testimony of P.W. 14 companyroborated by the medical evidence and other circumstances as the basis for the companyviction.
The deceased, Bigna Bedia, lived with his wife Sohagia Bedia and sons in village Karmatola.
The wife of Bigna was also injured with a cut injury on her face.
He has been residing in village Jawabera which is at a distance of about half a kilometer from Karmatola.
The prosecution case is that on account of enmity, the three appellants companymitted the crime.
From the Judgment and Order dated 9.11.1977 of the Patna High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
Gurja had a tangi, Birja had a lathi and Mukund had a pharsa.
332 of 1971.
Binga Bedia sustained fatal injuries and died instantaneously.
There he did number find any thief.
Sohagia claimed to be an eye witness.
Lalku and Jhalku reached his house at about midnight and raised hulla that some thieves had entered their house and killed their father and were also killing their mother.
On entering the house, he found Bigna Bedia lying dead with bleeding injuries on his head and legs.
She also stated that she became unconscious and regained companysciousness only the next day when the police arrived at the scene.
On hearing the alarm, the deceased was awakened from sleep and when he was trying to get up, all the three appellants left her and killed her husband.
The crime was registered against unidentified persons.
P.W. 1 then went to the villagers of Karmatola and told them about this incident.
Then taking Sawna Bedia, Jhopra Bedia and others along with him he went to the house of Bigna Bedia.
The three appellants are brothers.
There had been ill feeling between the appellants on the one hand and the deceased and his wife on the other, though the appellants are the sons of the eider sister of Sohagia.
P.W. 14 asserted that Gurja had been flashing a torch and that she had iden tified all the three appellants.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
She got injured and cried.
At about midnight, the intrud ers entered the house by cutting the tatti and attacked Sohagia and her husband.
According to this witness, the three appellants were armed.
96 of 1979.
On hearing this, P.W. 1 got up and went to village Jawabera where he informed his gotias about the incident.
and they also removed the lock and peg and took away utensils and two she goats from the house.
Jiwan Bedia, the brother of the deceased, on being informed by Jhalku and Lalku about the incident reached the house and after making enquiries, he lodged the first information report at the police station at about 10.00 A.M in the next morning.
P.W. 1 also companytacted the Mukhia of the village Hindebilli and others before going to the police station.
On entering the house Gurja and Birja dealt blows on Sohagia with the weapons they had.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by FATHIMA BEEVI, J. This appeal by special leave is di rected against the judgment and order dated 9.11.1977 of the High Court of Patna whereby the companyviction and sentences of the appellants for the offences under Sections 302,394 and 34, I .P.C., have been companyfirmed.
J .M. Khanna for the Appellants.
The incident happened on the night of 5/6.9.
Goburdhan for the Respondent.
He learnt there from the wife and both the sons of Bigna that 5 or 6 persons had entered the house by cutting the tatti and had inflicted injuries on Bigna and his wife with tangi, bhujali etc.
The High Court agreed with the trial companyrt in holding that the prosecution has succeed ed to bring home the guilt of all the appellants.
According to the prosecution, P.W. 14 is the only eye witness.
