Allahabad High Court
Amrit Lal And Ors. vs State Of U.P. on 10 May, 2000
Equivalent citations: 2000CRILJ4518
Author: M.C. Jain
Bench: M.C. Jain
JUDGMENT M.C. Jain, J.
1. All these appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 9-2-1999 passed by Sri Satti Deen, the then Special Addl. Sessions Judge, Mirzapur in Sessions Trial No. 20 of 1996. In all, there are eight appellants, Amrit Lal, Kalloo alias Sukh Lal, Mittal Pasi and Hari Lal Mallah are the appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 355 of 1999. Ganga Pasi is appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 356 of 1999, Criminal Appeal No. 701 of 2000 has been preferred by Nanda Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ram Ashrey Pasi. All of them excepting Hari Lal Mallah have been convicted under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 149, I.P.C. Four of them, namely, Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah, Ram Ashrey Pasi and Ganga Pasi have been sentenced to death. The remaining three, namely, Kalloo alias Sukh Lal, Amrit Lal and Mittal Pasi have been sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 149, I.P.C. Nandu Mallah, Kalloo alias Sukh Lal, Pancham Mallah, Ganga Pasi, Ram Ashrey Pasi, Amrit Lal and Mittal Pasi have further been convicted under Section 148, I.P.C. and each of them sentenced to three years' rigorous imprisonment. All the seven accused as well as Hari Lal Mallah have also been convicted under Section 201, I.P.C. and each of them has been sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years. All the substantive sentences have been ordered to run concurrently.
2. In this incident, two real brothers, namely, Raj Kumar and Ram Narain sons of Ram Garib PW 2 were murdered The incident took place on 30-7-95 at about 9.30 a.m. at Nifaraghat of river Ganges within Police Station Vindhyachal, District Mirzapur. The report of the incident was lodged by Ram Garib PW 2 at the concerned Police Station on 30-7-95 at 11 a.m. The distance of the Police Station from the place of occurrence was about 19 kms. The case, as unfolded by F.I.R. may be narrated thus.
3. The deceased Raj Kumar and Ram Narain had taken contract for the lifting of sand of village Babhani and Nadani and they used to go there for realisation of charges in this behalf. Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi also wanted to take the said contract and as they had not been able to succeed in this behalf, they were harbouring grudge against Raj Kumar and Ram Narain. On the fateful day at about 6 a.m. Ram Garib with Kanhaiya Lal had gone to the Ghat for realising the charges for sand lifting in consequence of the contract. At about 8 a.m. Raj Kumar and Ram Narain came to meet their father on motorcycle. When they were returning on the motorcycle at about 9.30 a.m. and reached the sand bed of Nifara, accused Ganga Pasi, Pancham Mallah and Nandu Mallah along with 4 or 5 others armed with Tangari, knives and country made pistols surrounded Ram Narain and Raj Kumar. Nandu Mallah and Pancham Mallah exhorted others; to kill them. Ram Narain and Raj Kumar both shouted, Ram Garib, Kanhaiya Lal, Bindu Mallah arid Mewa Lal rushed to them raising shouts, but the persons, aforesaid murdered Raj Kumar and Ram Narain both with knives and Tangari. They also threatened to kill Ram Garib, Kanhaiya Lal, Mindu Mallah and Mewa Lal if they dared to proceed ahead. Rani Garib ran towards village Nifara raising shouts but none came to the rescue. It was also mentioned by the informant in the F.I.R. that he could recognise the assailants other those named in the F.I.R. on coming face to face. The F.I.R. contains only this part of the prosecution story and rest has come to be revealed in the testimony of eye witnesses Mewa Lal PW 1 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 both of whom are named in the F.I.R. as the witnesses.
4. On lodging of such F.I.R., a case was registered by preparation of chik and entry in G.D. by H. C. Sardar Singh PW 7.
5. In the second part of the story the names of the other appellants were also revealed by the witnesses Mewa Lal and Kanhaiya Lal. According to them, Raj Kumar started running to river Ganges in northeastern side on receiving injuries. Amrit Lal and Kalloo alias Sukh Lal chased him with knives and the remaining five kept assaulting Ram Narain. Weapons of the accused-appellants have come to be revealed that Nandu Mallah. Pancham Mallah, Ram Ashrey Pasi and Ganga Pasi had axes recalled Tangari also). Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi were armed with country made pistols as well. Amrit Lal, Kalloo alias Sukh Lal and Mittal Pasi had knives. At a distance of about 400 paces. Kalloo alias Sukh Lal and Amrit Lal caught hold on Raj Kumar. The remaining five also rushed to join them and all of them murdered Raj Kumar also. They dragged the dead body of Raj Kumar to the river Ganges and dropped it therein. Then all of them returned to the dead body of Ram Narain, Nandu Mallah and Pancham Mallah cut off the hands of Ram Narain, Ram Ashrey Pasi and Ganga Pasi cut off of his head and the rest of them dragged his trunk to the western side and loaded the same at the boat of Hari Lal Mallah accused. The motorcycle was also loaded on the boat of Hari Lal Mallah through which the same had been taken by Ganga and Hari Lal Mallah up to Nasa. The dead body of Ram Narain was then downloaded from the boat on sand bed. Ganga and Hari Lal Mallah then carried the motorcycle on the boat of one of them. Hari Lal Mallah and threw it in the mud stream of Ganges. Then they went towards the Nifaraghat, Amrit Lal and Pancham Mallah then reached with their Dogi near the dead body of Ram Narain. Then Ram Ashrey Pasi, Nandu Mallah and Pancham Mallah brought the head and other dismembered parts of the dead body of Ram Narain from the spot where he was murdered. Trunk of Ram Narain was tied to the boat with the help of a rope. The boat was taken to a little distance and the dead body was sunk there. Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ram Ashrey Pasi also threw the dismembered portions of the dead body of Ram Narain in Ganges.
6. Only the dead body of the deceased Raj Kumar could be recovered from the river Ganges. After completion of the formalities of the preparation of Panchayatnama etc. his dead body was sent for post-mortem through constable Raj Narain Pandey PW 4 with another Constable Anil Kumar Dubey. The post-mortem over the dead body of the deceased was conducted by Dr. D. N. Giri PW 5 on 31-7-95 at 3 p.m. The deceased was aged about 27 years and about one day had passed since he died. The following ante-mortem injuries were found on his person.
1. Incised wound in an area of 3 x 1 x 5 cm deep on the front side of the neck 20 cm above from right nipple.
2. Incised wound 3 x .5 x .5 cm deep just above 1st injury i.e. .5 cm above 1st injury.
3. Incised wound 4 x .3 cm on the neck just below 1st injury i.e. 2 cm below from 1st injury.
4. Incised wound on the right side of the neck in an area of 3 x 1 x 2 cm deep, 2 cm below from the right ear.
5. Incised wound on the left side of the head in an area of 5 x 1 cm into muscle deep, 5 cm above from left ear.
6. Incised wound on the head in an area of 5 x 2 cm into muscle deep, 10 cm above from the right ear.
7. The death had occurred due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of ante-mortem injuries.
8. After conclusion of investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted charge-sheet against eight accused-appellants who came to be tried before the learned trial Court. Besides relying on documentary evidence, the prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses in support of its case. Out of them, Mewa Lal PW 1, Ram Garib PW 2 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 were examined as eyewitnesses of fact. Rest were Doctor, Investigating Officer and other police personnel. The accused also examined two witnesses in defence, namely, Yogesh Prasad Tewari DW 1 and Shridhar Dubey DW 2, Yogesh Prasad Tewari DW 1 was the Pradhan of village Babhani and he deposed that Ram Narain did not have any Theka of the sand of village Babhani. Shridhar Dubey DW 2 tendered evidence of alibi in respect of Mittal Pasi accused that that he used to work at his place as carpet weaver and on 30-7-95 he had come to the work at 6 a.m. and worked till 12 O' clock in the noon. In the afternoon also, he worked there from 2 p.m. to 6 p.m.
9. The prosecution evidence commended itself to the Court below and eight accused-appellants came to be convicted and sentenced as stated in the earlier part of the judgment.
10. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has also made a reference under Section 366, Cr.P.C. for confirmation of death sentence passed against the accused-appellants Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah, Ram Ashrey Pasi and Ganga Pasi, it is in this way that the matter is now before this Court.
11. At the hearing of the appeal only Sri P. N. Mishra representing the accused-appellant Ganga Pasi of Criminal Appeal No. 356 of 1999 appeared to argue it out, though all others were also represented on record by their counsel. We have heard Sri P. N. Mishra, learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of Ganga Pasi and learned A.G.A. from the side of the State. In our quest to reach the right conclusion, we have also carefully gone through the material and evidence on record. It is argued by Sri P. N. Mishra that the conduct of Ram Garib PW 2 was not unnatural that he immediately allegedly rushed to lodge the first information report without even waiting as to what the assailants could do to the dead bodies of his two sons who, according to him, had been murdered before him; all the accused-appellants were not named in the F.I.R., neither the motorcycle nor the dead body of Ram Narain could be recovered; the prosecution story was unnatural that the accused-appellants having firearms did not use the same; Mewa Lal PW 1 was a chance witness and the other two were close relatives of the deceased whose testimony was incapable of acceptance. With these submission, he urged that the prosecution case was not proved and conviction of the accused-appellants was not at all warranted. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has tried to support the impugned judgment and order. In the succeeding discussion, we intend to deal with the case in two parts, first in respect of the accused-appellants not named in the F.I.R. and thereafter concerning the accused-appellants named in the F.I.R.
12. To begin with, accused-appellants Ram Ashrey Pasi. Amrit Lal, Kalloo alias Sukh Lal, Mittal Pasi and Hari Lal Mallah are not named in the F.I.R. It is also pertinent to find that Ram Garib PW 2 who lodged the F.I.R. mentioned therein that the remaining accused-appellants could be recognised by him and other witnesses on corning face to face. We also note that the names of the witnesses- Mewa Lal PW 1 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 are mentioned in the F.I.R. It would be justifiable to infer that even the witnesses Mewa Lal PW 1 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 had not disclosed the names of the above five accused -appellants to the informant before he went to lodge the F.I.R. Had they done so, Ram Garib PW 2 would have got their names mentioned in the F.I.R. Had the witnesses disclosed the names of the above five accused to him, there would have been no occasion for him to mention in the F.I.R. that he as well as the witnesses could recognise the remaining assailants (other than Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi who were named in the F.I.R.) on coming face to face. The factum of non-mentioning of the names of above five accused-appellants in the F.I.R. gives a serious jerk to the prosecution case so far as they are concerned. It may also be stated that they had not been subjected to identification by the witnesses examined before the Court.
13. Indeed, the evidence as against these five accused-appellants has been given by Mewa Lal PW 1 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3, concerning the second part of the prosecution story related earlier. But it is also a fact that neither the dead body of the deceased Ram Narain nor motorcycle on which the two deceased were riding could be recovered. It would be recalled that as per the testimony delivered by Mewa Lal PW 1 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3, the dead body of Ram Narain had been dismembered by the accused-appellants and the same as also the motorcycle had been thrown in the river Ganges. As per the testimony of the Investigating Officer Ravi Shankar Mishra PW 6, only the dead body of Raj Kumar could be recovered from the river The dismembered dead body of Ram Narain and motorcycle could not be recovered in spite of net having been laid in the river. To say in other words, in spite of thorough search and combing in the river, motorcycle and dismembered parts of the dead body of Ram Narain could not be found. It is thus apparent that no external check or corroboration is there for the testimony of Mewa Lal PW 1 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 as regards the second part of the story mentioned above concerning the role of the accused-appellants Ram Ashrey Pasi, Amrit Lal, Kalloo alias Sukh Lal, Mittal Pasi and Hari Lal Mallah, who. as mentioned above, are not even named in the F.I.R. Of course, there does not appear to be any doubt that the total number of participants of this crime was 7 or 8 as mentioned in the F.I.R. also which is the earliest version of the prosecution. But identity of others excepting Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi is not at all established that they were actually Ram Ashrey Pasi, Amrit Lal, Kalloo alias Sukh Lal, Mittal Pasi and Hari Lal Mallah. It is the established principle of criminal jurisprudence that the prosecution is required to prove its case against each and every accused to the hilt by trustworthy and clinching evidence. The conviction cannot be based on mere surmises and freak inferences based on imagination or suspicion. Therefore, on a careful scrutiny of the evidence on record and attending circumstances, we are of the firm opinion that the prosecution case has not travelled from the range of suspicion to the realm of certainty so far as the accused-appellants Ram Ashrey Pasi, Amrit Lal, Kalloo alias Sukh Lal, Mittal Pasi and Hari Lal Mallah are concerned. We would, therefore, acquit them.
14. Now we take up the case as against the accused-appellants Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi. As mentioned earlier too, their names figured in the F.I.R. which was lodged by an eye-witness, Rarn Garib PW 2 without loss of time. The incident took place on 30-7-95 at about 9.30 a.m. and the report was lodged by him at the same day at 11 a.m. Obviously, no time gap intervened for concoction or deliberation. There was no occasion or motive either for the informant to have named them falsely as assailants of his son. It would be noted that he is the own father of the deceased Raj Kumar and Ram Narain. It cannot be lost sight, of that normally a close relative of the deceased would be most reluctant to spare the real assailant(s) and falsely substitute other person(s) as culprits(s). As per the F.I.R., the assailants were allegedly armed with knives, axe (Tangari) and countrymade pistols. It has come to be specified in the evidence adduced by three eye-witnesses before the Court that all these three accused-appellants, namely, Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi were armed with axes and countrymade pistols. The deceased Raj Kumar did sustain as many as six incised wounds on his body, capable of being caused by a sharp edged weapon like axe. They used their axes in assaulting the two deceased as per the testimony of the eye-witnesses. In our opinion, the defence cannot gain any strength by arguing that there is no reason as to why these .accused-appellants did not make use of their countrymade pistols to commit these murders. They used them only to scare away the witnesses after committing the murders. They made use of their axes in striking blows on the victims and it is not for the prosecution to offer an explanation as to why did they not use their firearm in committing murders. It may, however, be pointed out as a passing reference that the assailants numbered 7 or 8 including these three accused-appellants and they committed these murders almost surrounding the two victims. In such a scenario, they might not have thought it to be safe arid proper to use firearms for committing murders as the shots could hit their own companions participating in the crime.
15. It is also not possible to attach any importance to this argument advanced by Sri Mishra that Ram Garib PW 2 conducted himself in an unnatural manner by instantly running away from the spot to lodge the F.I.R. without watching the fall out of the murders of his sons in the form of the treatment meted out to their dead bodies. He had seen the murders of his two young sons with his own eyes. He must have been too shocked to react in a reasoned and cooled manner. It was natural that he conducted himself according to the first impulse that came to his head after he witnessed the murders of his two sons. We, accordingly, reject this argument which, in our considered view, has no merit.
16. Another argument of the learned counsel Sri Mishra is that Mewa Lal PW 1 belonged to another village Bahrojpur and was a chance witness and further that Ram Garib PW 2 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 were interested witnesses being father and cousin brother respectively of the deceased. A witness can be categorised as a chance or adventitious one if he could not normally be expected to be present at the scene of occurrence. On going through the testimony of Mewa Lal PW 1 (whose name finds place in promptly lodged F.I.R.), we find that he was also in sand business arid used to lift and load sand on his boat for being taken to Bahrojpur and sold there. On that day also, he had come to the spot for the same purpose at about 9.15 a.m. and had paid Rs. 40/- as Mahsool to Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 (who used to be there to collect Mahsool on behalf of Ram Narain and Raj Kumar-Contractors). He, thus, gave a plausible explanation for his presence at the spot. His testimony has a ring of truth that when Raj Kumar and Ram Narain started going towards Nifaraghat village on a motorcycle and reached near Nala, the present accused-appellants Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah, Ganga Pasi and others surrounded them and started assaulting them. It has also specifically been stated by him that he was loading sand from between Nadani and Babhani whereof the Theka had been taken by Ram Narain deceased. Accused-appellants Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi have not been able to assign any reason as to why this witness would depose falsely against them. To us, he does not appear to be a chance witness at all, rather he had regular purpose to be there at the spot and it was in that connection that he was present on the day of incident too.
17. So far as Ram Garib PW 2 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 are concerned, admittedly they are close relatives of the deceased. In a murder trial if the witnesses are relation of the deceased, then that itself does not make their evidence unreliable. It only casts a duty on the Court to scrutinize their evidence with more than ordinary care. When the testimony of these two witnesses is scrutinized with this yardstick, we find them to be perfectly believable so far as the accused-appellants Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi are concerned. Both of them had gone for collection of Mahsool for lifting of sand in consequence of Theka in respect of Nadani and Babhani Ghats. So, their presence at the spot was most natural as they were there on behalf of Ram Kumar and Ram Narain for collection of Mahsool charges. Sri Mishra has argued that admittedly the Theka of Nifaraghat had not been settled with the son of Ram Garib PW 2 and as such there could be no question of the presence of these two witnesses at Nifaraghat where the incident occurred. Reference has been made to the statement of Ram Garib PW 2 in paragraph 12 that Babhani Ghat is in the eastern side of Nadani Ghat and the distance between the two is 400 paces and that Nifaraghat is adjacent to Babhani Ghat. He also made reference to what he stated in paragraph 14 that he was realising Mahsool at Nadani Ghat. It has been reasoned that keeping in view the distance disclosed by him, he as well as Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 could not see the incident taking place at Nifaraghat. In our opinion, the argument is based on artificial angle of vision and on a pedantic approach, losing sight of practical aspect and reality. Indeed, conclusion has to be based on wholesome consideration of the evidence of the witnesses. Ram Garib PW 2 has also stated that limits of Babhani were up to the front of Nifara village. Actually, the fact that has been established by the evidence is that there was running sand band of Nadani, Babhani and Nifaraghats but there was no clear cut demarcation to separate the three. Obviously, the distance spoken by Ram Garib PW 2 is based on his estimation and cannot be viewed with exactitude. The bone of contention was that armed with Theka in respect of Nadani and Babhani, the deceased wanted to cover sand of as large area as could be possible. The boundaries being not defined with demarcation, confusion existed as to what limit the deceased could claim right for recovering Mahsool for lifting of sand. It has been stated by Mewa Lal PW 1 that occasionally the accused vised the stop sand lifting from Nadani and Babhani and they used to forcibly recover Mahsool themselves. So, the foundation of bad blood between the two sides was the tussle for recovering the Mahsool for lifting of sand from the vast running sand bed in respect of part of which (Nadani and Babhani) the Theka had been taken by the deceased persons. There is nothing unusual and surprising that Ram Garib PW 2 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 were attracted when Raj Kumar and Ram Narain were going on motorcycle towards Nifaraghat and were surrounded by their assailants including the present three accused-appellants, namely, Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi. It was a broad day light incident. There was nothing to obstruct the view of the witnesses to watch the incident in the running sand bed. Our conclusion is that the testimony of these two witnesses who are relatives of the deceased is acceptable against the accused-appellants. Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi that they with 4-5 others assaulted and murdered Raj Kumar and Ram Narain on the given date, time and place and they used their axes to achieve their object. Sri Mishra urged that the testimony of Ram Garib PW 2 was at least doubtful as against the accused-appellant Pancham Mallah. He pointed out that in the Court he wrongly identified Pancharn Mallah as Mittal Pasi. We are of the opinion that it was simply under the stress of cross-examination that this witness momentarily became blank and laid hand on Pancham Mallah saying that he was Mittal Pasi. We note that without any prompting he corrected himself in the very next breath that the person on whom he had laid hand was Pancham Mallah. More-over, the testimony of two other witnesses, namely, Mewa Lal PW 1 and Kanhaiya Lal PW 3 is also there as against Pancham Mallah to clinchingly prove him as one of the assailants of the victims.
18. To recapitulate, we find that the testimony of three eye-witnesses proves beyond all reasonable doubt that Nandu Mallah. Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi were three assailants along with 4 or 5 others (whose identity has not been established) who murdered Raj Kumar and Ram Narain on the given date, time and place. In assaulting, they used axes (sharp edged weapons). Their testimony finds corroboration from medical evidence as Raj Kumar (whose dead body alone could be recovered) sustained as many as six incised wounds. The dead body of the other victim Ram Narain could not be found. A trail of blood over the sand had also been found by the Investigating Officer which could be of the dragging of the dead body of Raj Kumar. The present three accused-appellants Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi were included amongst the assailants and they played active and potent role in the act of murders. This conclusion is also well warranted and justified that they committed offence under Section 201, I.P.C. too by screening or causing to disappear the evidence of this crime committed by them along with 4-5 others unknown persons. The axes used by them were deadly weapons. Total number of assailants was 7 or 8 persons. It is a different matter that the prosecution has not been able to establish as to who were 4-5 other companions of the accused-appellants Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi who participated in this crime. As assembly was of ' more than five persons, accused-appellants Nandu Mallah, Pancham Mallah and Ganga Pasi committed offence under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 149, I.P.C. while cutting short lives of two young brothers. As they were armed with axes, the offence of rioting committed by them is covered by Section 148, I.P.C. As mentioned earlier, they also committed offence under Section 201, I.P.C.
19. Learned trial Judge has awarded death sentence to them under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 149, I.P.C. three years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 148, I.P.C. and seven years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 201, I.P.C.
20. It should be pointed out that there has been unmistakable shift in the legislative emphasis for awarding life imprisonment for murder and capital punishment is to be resorted to only as exception and for special reasons. There is a changing trend against imposition of capital punishment. Having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that this case does not fall in the category of rarest of rare cases and extreme penalty of death is not called for. We would, therefore, modify their sentence from death to life imprisonment under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 149, I.P.C. Three years' rigorous imprisonment awarded to each of them under Section 148, I.P.C. and seven years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 201, I.P.C. does not call for any interference or modification. Needless to say, these two sentences would only be of theoretical importance as they would be ordered to run concurrently with the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to each of them under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 149, I.P.C.
21. In conclusion, we decide Reference No. 2 of 1999 and three appeals No. 355 of 1999, 356 of 1999 and 701 of 2000 as stated hereunder,-
(i) Reference No. 2 of 1999 is rejected.
(ii) Criminal Appeal No. 355 of 1999 is allowed. Conviction and sentences passed against the appellants Amrit Lal, Kalloo alias Sukh Lal, Mittal Pasi and Hari Lal Mallah are set aside. They are on bail. They need not surrender. Their personal bonds and bail bonds are hereby cancelled.
(iii) Criminal Appeal No. 356 of 1999 is partly allowed, though conviction of the appellant Ganga Pasi under Section 302 read with Sections 149 I.P.C., 148 I.P.C. and 201 I.P.C. is affirmed, but the sentence of death awarded under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 149 I.P.C. is converted into life imprisonment. Rest of the sentences awarded (3 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 148, I.P.C. and 7 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 201, I.P.C.) are maintained which shall run concurrently with his life imprisonment. He is already in jail. He shall serve out the sentences awarded to him.
(iv) Criminal Appeal No. 701 of 2000 is allowed so far as appellant Ram Ashrey Pasi is concerned. His conviction and sentences are set aside. He is in jail. He shall be set at liberty if not wanted in any other connection. However, in respect of appellants Nandu Mallah and Pancham Mallah the appeal is partly allowed. Though their conviction under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Sections 149 I.P.C., 148 I.P.C. and 201 I.P.C. is maintained, but the sentence of death awarded under Section 302, I.P.C. read with Section 119, I.P.C. is converted into life imprisonment. Rest of the sentences (3 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 148, I.P.C. and 7 years' rigorous imprisonment under Section 201, I.P.C.) awarded to Nandu Mallah and Pancham are maintained which shall run concurrently with their life imprisonment. Both of them are already in jail. They shall serve out the sentences awarded to them.
22. Let a copy of this judgment along with the record of the case be immediately sent to the Court below for needful compliance under intimation to this Court within two months positively.