2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of conviction and order of sentencs dated 8.112004, paSsed by tho Special Judge, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), Bastar at Jagdalpur in S.T.N0142/ 2004, whereby and Whereunder, the learned Special Judge, after holding the appellants guilty for formation of unlawful assembly, aimed with deadly weapons and causing death of Poyami Massu and injury to Poyami Lakhmu, convicted appellant- Beti Bijjo under Section 302, 148, 323/ 149 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo impiisonment for life and to pay a fine of RS500] -, in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for 1 month; R.I. for 3 years and RI. for 1 year respectively and the other appellants under Sections 302/ 149, 147, 323/ 149 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a tine of Rs.500/- in default of payment of fine to further undergo RJ. for 1‘ month; RI. for 2 years and RI. for 1 year respectively to each of the appellant. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. 3. The conviction is impugned on the ground that without any iota of evidence, the learned Special Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforementioned and thereby committed illegality. 4. As per case of prosecution, on fateful day of 5.2.2004 at about 7.00 pm, appellant Beti Bijjo called father of his daughter in law— Poyami Payke (PW—3) and deceased Payami Mas'su on the ground that behaviour of his daughter Poyami Payke (PW—3) is not normal. When they reached to the house of appellant Beti Bijjo then all the appellants assaulted them and assaulted to Poyami Massu. Poyami Massu fled from the spot, but they chased him to his field and appellant Beti Bijjo assaulted him by axe and other appellants assaulted by sticks and caused his death. Merg intimation was lodged vide Ex. P]2O by Poyami Lakhmu (PW~ 1), brother of Poyami Massu and he also lodged @ FIR vide EX. P/ 19. Investigating diEcar left for the sceneof occu‘mncs and after summoning witnessw inquest over the dead body was prepared V1de EX P] 16 Dead body was sent for utopsy to C H C Tokapal Autopsy was conducted by Dr S R Tekam (PW—2) V1de Ex. P/ 1 and found followmg mjunes incised Wound over left jaw of 2 x 1" and mandible bone was found fractured. Lacerated Wound over left side of the head of 3 x 5" and parietal bone waS found fractured m Lacerated wound over forehead of 1 x 0.4” and bone was found fractured iv. 4 abrasions of 0.5 x 0.5 over the neck lucised wound of 1 x 0.25” over small finger of right hand Mode of death was shock and death was homicidal in nature. Poyami Lakhmu was also examined by Dr. Somesh Pandey (PW—5) vide EX. P/4 and found ollowing injuries : i. swe on left cheek of 4 x 4 cm n haomotoma on left eye 1n swelling of 5 x 5 cm on chest During the course of invetigation, spot map was prepare vide Ex. P/21. Appellants were taken into custody. Appellant Beti Mitko made isclosure statement of stick vide Ex. P15; it was recovered at his instance vide Ex. P/6, Appellant odiyami Lakhma made disclosure statement of stick vide Ex. P/7; it Was recovered at his instance vide X. P/ 8. Appellant Beti Bijjo ade disclosure stateme of axe Vide Ex. PI9; the same was recovered at his instance ve Ex. PI 10. Appellant Beti Aayatu e disclosure statement of stick vide EX. P] 11; it was recovered at his instance vide Ex. P/ 12. Podiyami Jaggu mae disclosure statement of stick vide E P/ 1‘ same wa recovered his mstance Vide E Pl 1 Seed artles were sent fo cheal examinatio Statements of the inesses were recorded under a f ning s d d P E m nt id mad d X 8 s at x 4 iz ic r mic n Wt Saction 161 of the Code of Cn'minal Procedure, 1973 (in shalt the Code). 5. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was tiled before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jadgalpur, Who in turn, committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Bastar at Jagdalpur, from Where, the leamed Special Judge received the case on trailsfer for trial. .- 6. In order to prove the guilt of the accused/appellants, prosecution has examined as many as 8 witnesses. Accused] appellants were examined under Section 313 of the Code, where they denied the circumstances appeaiing against them, innocence and false implication in crime in question was claimed. They have examined defence witness Poyami Hadmo (DW— 1), who has deposed that in the intervening night of 5.2.2004 and 6.2.2004 he went to his field; at that time, he did not notice the dead body of Poyami Massu. However, on second day he saw the dead body of Poyami Massu in the filed. 7. After aifording oppmtunity of hearing to the parties, learned Special Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellants as aforementioned. 8. We have heard Shn' Abhijeet Sarkar, leained counsel for the appellants and Shri Ashish Shukla, learned Government Advocate for the State, judgment impugned and record of the Court below perused. 9. Learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that he is not disputing the injury caused to Poyami Lakhmu (PW— 1). In the light of evidence of prosecution witnesses, he is also not disputing formation of unlawful assembly, but he is disputing the injuries caused by the appellants to the deceased Poyami Massu. He argued that as per merg intimation Ex. P/ 2Q, FIR P/ 19 when Poyami Lakhmu (PW- 1) and his brother Poyami Massu went to the house of the appellants, thé appellants assaulted them and when they rushed towards eeld of Poyami Massu, all the appellants also chased them in the fleld. Appellant Beti Bijjo assaulted Poyami Massu with axe, due to which, he fell down and died. But, in their evidence they have not deposed regarding any incident took place in the held of Poyami Massu. As per their evidence, the entire incident took place in the house of the appellants, but dead body was not found in the house of the appellants; no blood stains were found in the house of the appellants; no dragging mark or blood stains were found from the house of the appellants till the held of Poyami Massu. These circumstances completely exclude the possibility that the appellants have caused injury to Poyami Massu. Learned counsel further argued that as per Ex. P/ 20, distance of the field, here the dead body was found, was 900 yards; in these circumstances, it is not natural and possible that all 5 persons chase and assault the deceased in the field. He argued that suspicion, however grave, cannot take place of legal evidence. Prosecution is required to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. 10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposed the arguments and submitted that the evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution is suhicient for drawing an inference that present appellants have committed the aforesaid oh‘ence. 1 1. In order to appreciate arguments advanced on behalf of the parties, we have examined the evidence adduced on behalf of the parties. 12. In the present case, homicidal death as a result of fatal injury found over the body of the deceased — Poyami Massu has not been substantially disputed on behalf of the appellants, on - the other hand, it is established by the evidence of Dr. S.S. Tekam (PW-2) and autopsy report EX.P/ 1. It is also not disputed w that simplc injuries were found ov€r the body of Poyami Lakhmu, on the other hand, it is 6stab1ished by the evidence of Dr. Somesh Pandey (PW-5) and injuxy report EXP/4. As per evidence of Poyami Lakhmu (PW~1), Poyami Payke (PW~3), Poyami Mate (PW—4), appellants have caused injuxy to Poyami Lakhmu. They were present in the house of the appellants. Appellant Beti Bijjo was holding axe and rest of the appellants were holding sticks. This shows that they have formed unlawful assembly, armed with deadly weapons. In furtherance of common object of unlawful assembly, they have caused injury to Poyami Lakhmu. The conviction and sentence of the appellants under Section 147, 148, 823/ 149 of the IPC is based on credible and clinching evidence sustainable under the law. 13. As regards commission of culpable homicide amounting to murder of Poyami Massu by the appellants is concerned, as per merg intimation Ex. P/ 20 and FIR P/ 19, firstly, the incident took place in the house of the appellants. They chased Poyami Massu when he fled from the spot and assaulted him in his held. Spot map EX. P/ 21 shows that dead body of Poyami Massu was found in the tiled at a distance of 900 yards from the house of the appellants. No dragging mark or blood stains were found from the house of the appellants till the filed of Massu. As per evidence of Poyami Lakhmu (PW-1) when he along with his brother Poyami Massu went to the house of the appellants, the appellants have assaulted them. This evidence finds support to the evidence of Poyami Payke (PW—3), daughter and wife of Poyami Aaytu. As per their evidence Poyami Massu was beaten by all the appellants in the house of the appellants, but the dead body was not found in the house of the appellants. r No blood stains were found in the house of the appellants. In their cross examination, they have admitted that Poyami Lakhmu became unconscious and he was unconscious throughout the night. Other witnesses have deposed that when they went to the house, \ \. R.L. Jhanwar S Judge .****...* ‘ " 1a i‘ iil