— .^ ...^, HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR DIVIS10N BENCH CORAM: HON'BLE MR. T.P. SHARMA AND HON'BLE MR. R.N. CHANDRAKAR, JJ. Criminal Appeal No.775 of 2008 ShankarSonkar' -Versus- State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No.794 of 2008 Bansilal Sonkar and three others - Versus - State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No.873 of 2008 Manoj Yadav alias Jaggu - Versus - State of Chhattisgarh Criminal Appeal No.901 of 2008 Sonesh @ Sonu Thakur - Versus - State of Chhattisgarh AND Criminal Appeal No.902 of 2008 Goverdhan Nirmalkar - Versus - State of Chhattisgarh JUDGMENT FOR CONSIDERATION HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.N. CHANDRAKAR ^ G^y^&js^ Sd/- T.P.Sharma Judge Sd/- R.N. Chandrakar Judge Post for pronouncement of judament on 20l" September, 2011 ith Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge .f ^fc.0^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH. B1LASPUR DIVISION BENCH '^ CORAM: HON'BLE MR. T.P. SHARMA AND HON'BLE MR. R.N. CHANDRAKAR, JJ. APPELLANT: (In Jail) RESPONDENT: APPELLANTS: (In Jail) RESPONDENT: APPELLANT: (In Jail) RESPONDENT: Criminal Appeal N6.775 of 2008 Shankar Sonkar, S/o Tulsiram Sonkar, Aged about 39 years, R/o Tillu Chowk, Near Sub-Post Office, Lakhe Nagar, P.S. Purani Basti, Raipur, DistrictRaipur (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through Station House Officer, P.S. Purani Basti, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G.) Criminal Appeal No.794 of 2008 1. Bansilal Sonkar, S/o Makhanlal Sonkar, Aged about 24 years, R/o Sonkar Para, P.S. Purani Basti, Raipur (C.G.) 2. Manish @ Raju, S/o Manohar Sonkar, Aged about 19 years, R/o Behind Danteshwari Mandir, Kushalpur, P.S. Purani Basti, Raipur (C.G.) 3. Manoj Sonkar, S/o Shiv Kumar Sonkar, Aged about 20 yrs., R/o Bandhwa Para, Purani Basti, P.S. Purani Basti, Raipur 4. Hemant Dewangan, S/o Lakshmi Narayan Dewangan, Aged about 22 yrs., R/o Bandhwa Para, Purani Basti, P.S. Purani Basti, Raipur (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh through District Magistrate, District Raipur (c.G.) Criminal Appeal No.873 of 2008 Manoj Yadav alias Jaggu, S/o Narendra Yadgv, Aged about 20 years, R/o Gopiyapara, P.S. Purani Basti, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh, Through Station hlouse Officer, P.S. Purani Basti, Raipur, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) .^ -^: Criminal Appeal No.901 of 2008 ©) APPELLANT: (In Jail) RESPONDENT: APPELLANT: (In Jail) RESPONDENT: Sonesh @ Sonu Thakur, Aged about 19 years, S/o Arvind Singh Thakur, R/o Brandaban Nagar, Kushalpur, Police Station Purani Basti, Raipur District Raipur Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police Station Purani Basti, Raipur District Raipur (C.G.) Criminal Appeal No.902 of 2008 Goverdhan Nirmalkar aged 19 years S/o Shri Ram Kumar Nirmalkar R/o Mathpara, Shitala Chowk Police Station Tikarapara Tahsil & District Raipur (C.G.) Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through Police Station PuraniBasti, District Raipur (C.G.) {Criminal appeals under Section 374 (2) ofthe Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973} Present: Mrs. Indira Tripathi, counsel forthe appellant in Cr.A.No.775/2008. Mr. S.C. Verma, counsel forthe appeltants in Cr.A.No.794/2008. Mr. Kshitij Sharma, counsel forthe appellant in Cr.A.No.873/2008. Mr. Vivek Rathore, counsel forthe appetlant in Cr.A.No.901/2008. Mr. Jitendra Nath Nande, counsel for the appellant in Cr.A. No.902/2008. Mr. J.A. Lohani, Panel Lawyerforthe State/respondent. JUDGMENT ^th (20mSeptember,2011) The followina iudament ofthe Court was passed bv T.P. Sharma. J: - 1. Since all the above criminal appeals are arising out of the common judgment of conviction & order of sentence dated 6-8-2008 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Raipur, in Special Sessions Trial No.35/2007, they are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2. By these appeals the appellants have challenged legality & propriety of the judgment of conviction & order of sentence dated 6-8-2008 passed by the Special Judge (Atrocities), Raipur, in Special Sessions Trial No.35/2007, whereby & whereunder learned Special Judge after holding y" "•'•-^^^ •^. -^ the appellants guilty for formation of unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons having its common object to commit culpable homicide amounting to murder of Agga @ Ajay & Pappu @ Poonam and in furtherance of common object of the assembly forcommitting the murder 6f Agga @ Ajay & Pappu @ Poonam, convicted the appellants under Sections 302, 120B, 147 & 148 of the IPC and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life & pay fine of Rs.15,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo Rl for one year; to undergo imprisonment for life & pay fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo Rl for three months; to undergo Rl for two years; and to undergo Rl for three years, respectively. Sentences were directed to run currently. 3. Judgment of conviction & order of sentence is challenged on the ground that without any iota of evidence to connect the appellants with the crime in question, the trial Court has convicted & sentenced the appellants as aforementioned and thereby committed illegality. 4. As per case of the prosecution, on the fateful night of 4-12-2006 at about 10.30 p.m. Agga @ Ajay (since deceased) & Pappu @ Poonam(since deceased) were present near Devvati School, Sonkarpara Tiraha (a junction of three paths or roads); on account of previous enmity, appellant Bansi Sonkar along with all other seven accused/appellants came to the spot; they were holding knife and other weapons; they caused fatal injuries to Agga @ Ajay & Pappu @ Poonam; and caused their instantaneous death on the spot. Shyam Sundar (PW-8), Ajit Khandekar (PW-3) and Ramgopal Ragade (PW-12) were present on the spot. Shyam Sundar (PW-8) immediately went to Police Station Purani Basti, Raipur and lodged FIR within thirty minutes vide Ex.P-17. Morgue was recorded vide Exs. P-18 & P-19. The investigating officer left for the scene of occurrence and after summoning the witnesses vide Exs.P-1 & P-2, prepared inquest over the dead bodies of Agga @ Ajay & Pappu @ Poonam vide Exs.P-3 & P-4. One motorcycle was seized from the spot vide Ex.P-5. Bloodstained & plain soil, one wrist watch, broken piece of belt of wrist watch and black cover of knife were seized from the spot vide Ex.P-20. Bloodstained & plain SQ!I, broken handle of knife and 156 playing cards were also seized from the spot vide Ex.P-21. Dead body of deceased Agga @ Ajay was sent for autopsy to Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur. Dr. Shivnarayan Manji (PW-9) conducted autopsy on the dead .^~v: ^ body of Agga @ Ajay vide Ex.P-24 and found following injuries/ symptoms: - (1) Incised wound of 13 c.m. x 3.5 c.m. x 3 c.m. on left side of neck up to vertebra deep. (2) Stab wound over left side of neck near thyroid cartilage in the size of 3 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x 3.5 c.m. up to vertebra deep. (3) Stab wound over right cheek of 3 c.m. x 1 c.m. up to mouth cavity deep. (4) Incised wound just above the hyoid bone on neck of 3 c.m. x 0.2 c.m. (5) Multiple abrasions over neck of size ranging 0.5 c.m. to 1 c.m. x 0.2 c.m. (6) Stab wound between both the nipples of 4 c.m. x 2 c.m., sternum bone was found cut, puncture of right heart of 3 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. size, 700 m.1. of blood was found in thorax cavity. (7) Another stab wound just below injury No.6 in the size of 6 c.m. x 2.4 c.m. parallel to injury No.6. (8) Deep stab wound near [eft nipple of 3 c.m. x 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. (9) Stab wound present on 3c.m. below to injury No.7 in the size of 3 c.m. x 1 c.m. x 10.5 c.m. effecting liver and caused cut injury upon liver of 2.5 c.m. x 1 c.m. and 2.2 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. (10) Stab wound on right hypochondriac region in the size of 3.5 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. up to cavity deep. (11) Stab wound on abdomen 3.5 c.m. above from umbilicus. (12) Stab wound on abdomen 2 c.m. right to injury No.11. (13) Stab wound 2 c.m. right to injury No.12 of 2 c.m. x 0.9 c.m. veri:ical obliquely placed. (14) Stab wound on both sides of ferrtoral region of same size of 3 c.m. x 1 c.m. x muscle deep. (15) Superficial incised wound on left arm anterior aspect mid part of4 c.m. x 3 c.m. x skin deep. (16) Incised wound on right hand of 2 c.m. x 2 c.m. x bone deep. (17) Incised wound on left index finger upper part 2.5 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x bone deep. Cause of death of Agga @ Ajay was shock due to haemorrhage and shock as a result of multiple wounds. Death was homicidal in nature. f l......-s'<?£^^ :1 '^'^^^ i1 ^ '-^p-" J^- \ 5. Dead body of deceased Pappu @ Poonam was also sent for autopsy to Ambedkar Hospital, Raipur. Dr. R.K. Singh (PW-19) conducted autopsy on the dead body of Pappu @ Poonam vide Ex.P-39 and found following injuries/symptoms: - Incised wounds on followina parts ofthe bodv: - (1) Forehead upper part transverse 3.5 c.m. x 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. (2) Just lower to injury No.(1) laterally left side forehead vertical 2 c.m. x0.2c.m. xO.lc.m. (3) Lateral end left eye transverse 1.2 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x 0.2 c.m. (4) Left eye upper lid middle vertical 3c.m. x 1.5 c.m. 0.8 c.m. (5) Left maxillary eminence transverse 3 c.m. x 1.2 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. (6) Just proximal to left index finger transverse 2 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. (7) Left forearm distal1/3rd part posterior of transverse 2.5 c.m. x 1 c.m. x 1 c.m. (8) Left forearm proximal 1/3 part transverse 3.5 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. x 1 c.m. (9) Left forearm middFe transverse 2 c.m. x 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. (10) Left thigh upper 1/3rd anterior 1.5 c.m. x 0.8 c.m. x 1.2 c.m. (11) Right upper arm lower 1/3 part posterior medial of 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. (12) Left thigh lateral aspect middle vertical 7 c.m. x 2.5 c.m. x 2 c.m. (13) Just above root of neck on neck anterior middle 2.8 c.m. x 1 c.m. 2.4 c.m. deep. (14) Right scapular region lower medial part transverse 4.5 c.m. x 2 c.m. x 3 c.m. deep. Stab wounds on followina parts of the bodv: - (15) Right side chest anterior 3 c.m. below nipple 2 c.m. x 1 c.m. upper end directed medically and narrow. It has entered into both lungs. Size ofwound is 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. (16) Right side chest just below to above stab wound, size 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x 1.5c.m. (17) Rightflankofchestlower1/3rd,size1 c.m. x0.5 c.m.x 1.5 c.m. (18) Epigastric region, size 1 c.m. x 0.7 c.m. x 2 c.m. (19) Epigastric region just below to above stab wound, size 0.8 c.m. x 0.4 c.m. x 1 c.m. .•y>^ ^^&S^ •y -^. l' ^'^.^ff'^: ;; .•••'••^ (20) Upper part of abdomen just below to above stab wound transverse 2 c.m. x 1 c.m., total depth 6.5 c.m. (21) Left side of abdomen just left to above stab wound 1.2 c.m. x 0.5 c.m., total depth 5 c.m. (22) Left side of abdomen, size 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m., total depth 4.5 c.m. (23) Throygh the loops of intestines are protruding and in external to abdomen entered into left kidney, size 0.8 c.m. x 0.5c.m. x 1 c.m. (24) Left lower abdomen laterally, size 0.7 c.m. x 0.4 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. (25) Left lower abdomen slightly lower to above wound, size 1 c.m. x 0.4 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. (26) Left lower abdomen, lying lower to above wound, 2 c.m. x 1.5 c.m. x6c.m. (27) Right side of abdomen at the place of umbilicus, size 1.2 c.m. 0.8 x 4 c.m. (28) Slight lower to umbilicus right lower end, size 1.2 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x 4 c.m., deep up to length of intestine. (29) Right side of abdomen, slight lateral to above wound, size 1.5 c.m. xO.Sc.m. x6 c.m.' Injuries found over the body of Pappu @ Poonam were ante mortem in nature and were sufficient for causing death. 400 m.1. blood was found over right thorax cavity and 500 m.1. blood was found in abdominal cavity. Smell of liquor was found. Mode of death was shock & haemorrhage. Death was homicidal in nature. 6. During course of investigation, one caste certificate Article 'A' and one domicile certificate Article 'B' were seized from Shyam Sonkar vide Ex.P- 10. Sealed clothes and viscera of Pappu @ Poonam were seized vide Ex. P-14. Sealed clothes and viscera of Agga @ Ajay were seized vide Ex.P-15. Photocopies of documents of vehicle were seized from Shyam Sonkar vide Ex. P-22. Accused Bansilal was taken into custody, he made discloser statement of gupti (dagger) & katar(knife) vide Ex.P-30, same were recovered at the instance of Bansilal vide Ex.P-35. Accused Sonesh @ Sonu also made discloser statement of dagger (gupti) and knife (katar) vide Ex. P-31 that same were in possession of accused Bansilal. Papers of motorcycle were seized from accused Bansilal vide Ex.P-32. Bloodstained clothes of accused Sonesh Thakur were seized from him vide Ex. P-33. Bloodstained clothes were seized from accused Manish Sonkar vide Ex. P-34. Bloodstained clothes were seized from accused Bansilal vide Ex.P-36. Hero Honda Passion Plus motorcycle was seized from accused Sonesh Thakur vide Ex. P-6. Bajaj Discover motorcycle was seized from accusedBansilal vide Ex.P-7. Bloodstained clothes were seized from accused Goverdhan vide Ex. P-8. Bloodstained clothes were seized from accused Manoj Yadav vide Ex.P-9. 7. Statements of the witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C.. Seized knife and dagger were sent for chemical examination to the doctor. Seized articles were sent for chemical examination and presence of blood over clothes of the accused/appellants, dagger and knife was confirmed vide Ex. P-52. 8. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur, who committed the case to the Court of Sessions, Raipur and the case was sent to the Special Judge (Atrocities), Raipur for trial. 9. In order to prove the guilt of the accused/appellants, the prosecution has . examined as many as twenty-three witnesses. The accused persons were examined under Section 313 of the CrPC in which they denied the cjrcumstances appearing against them and pleaded innocence & false implication. lO.After providing opportunity of hearing to the parties, tearned Special Judge under the Atrocities Act, convicted & sentenced the appellants in the aforesaid manner. 11. We have heard learned counsel for the parties, perused the judgment and record of the trial Court. 12.Mrs. Indira Tripathi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Shankar Sonkar in Cr.A.No.775/2008, vehemently argued that conviction is based on the evidence of interested, inimical & relative witnesses Shyam Sundar (PW-8), Anil Ragde (PW-21) & Umesh Sahu (PW-1), which does not inspire confidence and is not trustworthy. Shyam Sundar (PW-8) - brother of deceased Pappu, has lodged FIR vide Ex.P-17 within half an hour of the alleged incident in which he has informed the police that accused Bansi Sonkar along with his friends has caused murder of his brother Poonam and Agga by sharp edged weapon knife and that at the time pf incident, Ajit Khandekar & Ramgopal Ragde were present on the spot. He has also informed the police that other persons n i%s^ ^IS",.^ l'-^^^ ^^ 8 .^ ^^ of the ward were also present and he was frightened to seen the jncident. He has also lodged merg vide Exs.P-18 & P-19. In his evidence before the Court, he has deposed that he knew all the accused, he knew appellants Bansi, Shankar & Manoj by name and other appellants by face. He has identified some appellants when they were shown by the prosecution through video conferencing. Mrs. Indira Tripathi further argued that Shyam Sundar (PW-8) has not named all the accused persons except Bansi, his statement under Section 161 of the CrPC as Ex.D-1 was recorded on 5-12-2006 on second day of the incident in which he has mentioned the name of Shankar Sonkar and names of other accused persons. In these circumstances, his evidence without further corroboration from independent sources i.e. from the evidence of other two persons whose names find place in the FIR Ex.P- 17 namelyAjit Khandekar & Ramgopal Ragde, cannot be believed. The prosecutjon has examined Ramgopal Ragde as PW-12 and Ajit Khandekar as PW-3, but both the witnesses have not corroborated the evidence of Shyam Sundar (PW-8) or the case of the prosecution. In case of double murder that too by eight accused persons, heavyburden to prove the commission of offence was on the prosecution, but the prosecution has utterly failed to discharge its burden. Evidence of Shyam Sundar (PW-8) is not sufficient for drawing definite conclusion against appellant Shankar Sonkar orother appellants. 13.Mrs. Indira Tripathi placed reliance in the matterof Shankarlal v. State of Rajasthan in which the Supreme Court has held that evidence of chance witness and solitary witness if unnatural relating to post-incident and inconsistency in his evidence, same is not safe to rely, accused is entitled to benefit of doubt. Mrs. Indira Tripathi further placed reliance in the matter of Sajjan Sharma v. State of Bihar in which the Supreme Court has held that name of assailant known to the informant of FIR but not finds place in the FIR, only his name finds place in the deposition of informant, other witness who had witnessed the incident was examined after so many days and till that date there is no discloser of name of the accused/appellant, such evidence is not safe to rely for conviction of such accused. Mrs. Indira Tripathi also placed reliance in the matter of Suresh Chaudhary v. State of Bihar3 in which the Supreme Court has 1 (2004)108cc 632 2 2011 Cri.L.J. 1169 3 (2003)48cc 128 held that glaring omissions and contradictions in evidence of sole eye witness who was also relative of the deceased, in triple murder case, in case pf multiple gunshot injuries and recovery of only one empty cartridge, whole story becomes doubtful and accused is entitled to benefitof doubt. 14.Mr. S.C. Verma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of ap|Jellants Bansilal Sonkar, Manish @ Raju, Manoj Sonkar & Hemant Dewangan in Cr.A.No.794/2008, vehemently argued that the prosecution was under obligationto prove the case beyond all reasonable doubts, but it has examined only substantial witness Shyam Sundar (PW-8) whose evidence suffers from discrepancy, omission, contradiction & infirmity. Evidence of Shyam Sundar (PW-8) does not find corroboration from independent sources, he was present on the spot from beginning to end, but he has not tried to intervene or save his brother Pappu (since deceased). He has not deposed in his evidence and informed the police at the time of lodging FIR that as to who has caused injuries bywhich object over which part of the body. Although complete details of the act attributed to the appellants or injuries caused by each of the accused to the deceased persons upon different parts of the body was not possible, but at least the person who has witnessed the incident is required to depose substantially as to who has caused injury to whom, by which weapon and over which main part of the body like head, back, chest, abdomen etc. However, Shyam Sundar (PW-8) has not deposed in his evidencethe aforesaid facts. Only on the ground that two persons have been killed, liability cannot be fastened upon the appellants without credible and clinching evidence. 15.Mr. S.C. Verma placed reliance in the matter of Hasan Murtza v. State of Haryana in which the Supreme Courthas held that contradictions/ exaggerations/embellishments/inconsistencies in the evidence of sole eyewitness, relative of the deceased, and material facts not stated to the police, such evidence is not safe to rely. Mr. S.C. Verma further placed reliance in the matter of Sohan and another v. State of Haryana and another in which the Supreme Court has held that inconsistencies, contradictions and omissions in theevidence of sole eyewitness require corroboration from independent sources, but the prosecution is under 4 (2002) 3 SCC 1 5 (2001)38cc 620 10 obligation to establish guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt, these principles are to be kept in mind by the trial Judge/Magistrate at the time of judgment. Mr. S.C. Verma also placed reliance in the matter of Govind Narain v. State of Rajasthan in which the Supreme Court has held that in case the FIR is vague, it gives the chance of improvement at the time of trial or further investigation and on the basis of such evidence, conviction is not safe. 16.Mr. Jitendra Nath Nande, leamed counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Goverdhan Nirmalkar in Cr.A.No.902/2008, vehemently argued that name of appellant Goverdhan Nirmalkar does not find place in the FIR, he has not been identified by the witnesses and the prosecutionjias not proved his presence at the time of incident. Evidence adduce^ on behalf of the prosecution is not sufficient to connect appellant GoverdhSl Nirmalkar with the crime in question. Therefore, he is entitled for acquittal. 17.Mr. Jitendra Nath Nande placed reliance in the matter of Charan Singh and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh in which the Supreme Court has held that conviction with aid of Section 149 of the IPC may be based on commission of the offence in sharing 'common object' and not on 'common intention'. Word 'knew' used in second branch of Section 149 of the IPC cannot be made to bear the sense of "might have,been known" and positive knowledge is necessary. . 18.Mr. Kshiti] Sharma, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Manoj Yadav alias Jaggu in Cr.A.No.873/2008, vehemently argued that appellant Manoj Yadav alias Jaggu is not relative of other accused persons/the prosecution has not proved his presence on the spot, his name does not find place in the FIR and he is not resident of same vicinity. Evidence adduced on behalf of the prosecution is not sufficient for his conviction.^ ' . 19.Mr. Vivek Rathore, learned counsel appearing on behalf of appellant Sonesh @ Sonu Thakur in Cr.A.No.901/2008, vehemently argued that the prosecution witnesses have not named appellant Sonesh @ Sonu' Thakur and Shyam Sundar (PW-8) has not identified him. In absence of any identification and evidence relating to presence of appellant Sonesh 1993 LawSuit(SC) 312 7A[R2004SC2828 11 @ Sonu Thakur, conviction and sentences imposedupon him even with aid ofSection 149 ofthe IPC are not sustainable underthe law. 20.0n the other hand, Mr. J.A. Lohani, learned Panel Lawyer appearing on behalf of the State/respondent, vehemently opposed the appeals and submitted that witnesses examined in the Court after considerable lapse of time, then minor variations, contradictions and omissions in their evidence are neither unnatural nor unexpectedand does not vitiate case of the prosecution. The fact that the accused persons gone together armed with deadly weapons and thereafter caused death shows their common intention. Mr. J.A. Lohani further argued that it is not always necessary for the prosecution to establish definite motive for commission of crjme to secure conviction of accused, it would always be relatable to facts and circumstances of a givencase. Absence of motive does not essentially result in acquittal of accused if he is otherwise found guilty by cogent and reliable evidence. However, in cases which are entirely or mainly based upon circumstantial evidence, motive can have greater relevancy or significance. 21.Mr. J.A. Lohani further argued that the prosecution has proved its case beyond all reasonable doubts. Evidence of Shyam Sundar (PW-8) supported by evidence of Umesh Sahu (PW-1) & Anil Ragde (PW-21) is sufficient for drawing definite conclusion that all appellants have committed double murder ofAgga & Pappu. In the present case, Shyam Sundar (PW-8) has lodged FIR vide Ex.P-17, but he has not mentioned the names of all appellants, however, he has specifically stated in FIR Ex.P-17 that appellantBansi along with his friends has caused fatal injuries by sharp edged weapon knife and caused murder of Agga & Pappu. He has further specifically stated in the FIR that at the time of incident, he was badly frightened, then he went to the police station for lodging report and he has lodged report within thirty minutes of the incident. In morgue Exs.P-18 & P-19, he has further explained