The 8 accused belonged to three different families.
Ram Lakhan gave garasa blow on the head of Bharat.
It was further alleged that the villagers companyld number tolerate the high handed act of Ram Prasad and his brothers in assaulting Manogi they came to the Gairmazarua land where the accused Manogi was assaulted by Ram Prasad and there was a free fight between the villagers on one side and Ram Prasad and other members of the family on the other in which Ram Prasad was killed.
The accused fled away.
Sarjug and Suraj Mahto the two brothers were sitting near their tubewell towards the south of the village Bayapur when accused Ram Lakhan armed with garasa and the other accused armed with bhalas came suddenly in a mob and began to demolish the stairs attached to the tubewell.
The remaining accused are also alleged to have companytinued wielding their bhalas and Ramcharans bhala struck the right hand of Bharat.
The High Court rejected the defence version.
The appellant Sheo Mahadeo Singh and accused Ram Nagina are the sons of accused Ram Charan.
The accused Ram Rattan is the son of accused Ram Lakhan.
The accused pleaded innocence.
The prosecution case in short is that at about 7 A. M. on 23 October, 1965 the accused Rajballam and seven others including the appellant attacked Ram Prasad and other members of the prosecution party.
The defence was that there was some quarrel on the date of occurrence much before 7 A.M. between accused Manogi on one side and Sarjug and others of family on the other and further that the brothers of the deceased Ram Prasad assaulted accused Manogi.
The motive for the occurrence alleged by the prosecution was that the accused were envious of Sarjug Prasad and others of his family having companystructed tube well 5 6 months before the occurrence and at the time of the occurrence the accused came armed with the object of forcibly removing the tube well and on protest being made against their action, they companymitted the assault and the murder.
Then the accused Rajballam gave a bhala blow at the throat of Ram Prasad who died at the spot.
The accused Sheo Pujan Singh and Rajballam are sons of the accused Manogi Singh.
Several persons of the village came as a result of hue and cry.
Some of them pleaded alibi as well The plea of alibi was rejected by the trial Court and was number pressed in the High Court.
On protest by these two brothers under orders of assault given by the accused Ram Charan, the accused Manogi and the appellant gave bhala blows on the person of Sarjug Prasad.
The appellant and seven others are all Gwalas by caste and residents of village Rayapur situated at a distance of 5 miles from Maner Police station in the District of Patna where the occurrence took place.
On alarm raised by Sarjug and Suraj Mahto, their other brothers Lakshman and Ram Prasad, the deceased, arrived there and protested against the action of the accused.
N. Ray, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court at Patna dated 28 February, 1967 allowing the appeal in part by acquitting Earn Rattan Singh, Sheo Pujan Singh and Ram Nagina Singh and acquitting the remaining accused of the charge under Section 447 of the Indian Penal Code and dismissing the appeal by upholding the companyviction of those remaining accused under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and of the appellant and accused Manogi Singh under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code and altering the sentence of death imposed on Raj ballam into one of rigorous imprison ment for life.
