Z. A. CHANNA, J.----The two appellants have been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Badin, of committing, in furtherance of their common intention, murder of one Vikio Odhejo, attempting to commit murder of his name sake, Vikio Malah, and causing injuries with hatchets to both of them and have been sentenced on the first count to death, and a fine of Rs. 3,000 or in default to R. I for 3 years, on the second count to R.I. For seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000 each or in default to suffer further R I. For 2-- years and the third count to suffer for one year, with the direction that the substantive sentences of imprisonment are to run concurrently. This judgment will dispose of both the appeals preferred by the appellants against their convictions and sentences as well as the reference received from the learned Sessions Judge for the confirmation of the capital sentences awarded by him to the appellants.
2. The incident which has given rise to the instant case occurred on 27th July 1973, at about 8-30 p.m. In front of the main gate of Rex Cinema in Badin city at a distance of two furlongs from Badin Police Station. The prosecution case is that the two Vikies had gone to see a show at Rex Cinema along with their friends. During interval, the two Vikies came out, seeking some refreshment, leaving their other companions sitting in the Cinema. They went to a hand-cart vendor of Kababs near the main bate of Rex Cinema and just as they were eating the Kababs which they had ordered the two appellants are said to have suddenly turned up, armed with knives. Both of them are alleged to have attacked deceased Vikio Odbejo, causing him several injuries. Vikio Malah intervened to rescue his companion, whereupon the two appellants turned upon him and also attacked him, causing him a number of injuries with their knives. The incident was witnessed by Khaliqdinno Abdul Jabbar and Saleb, who were taking tea at a table outside Drivers Hotel which was nearby.
Vikio Odbejo's father, Ali Mohammad, came post-haste to the scene of offence and immediately removed the two injured in a Tonga, with the assistance of P. W. Khaliqdinno, to the Badin hospital.
Thereafter, Ali Mohammad and Khaliqdinno went to the Badin police station where the former lodged his first information report which was recorded by S.H.O. Allahbux at 21.15 hours, that is 45 minutes after the incident.
3. S.H.O. Allahbux accompanied first informant Ali Mohammad to the Civil Hospital but found Vikio Odhejo unconscious. However, Vikio Malah was in his senses and accordingly the S.H.O. Recorded his statement. The S.H.O. Next inspected the scene of offence which was shown to him by P W.
Khaliqdinno. He found blood at the vardat which he secured. At the vardat, the S.H.O. Recorded the statements of Dost Mohammad, Mohammad Hashim, Pir Bux and Murid. On the following day, upon receipt of information that Vikio Odhejo had died of his injuries in the Hospital, the S. H. O. Went to the Badin Hospital and prepared inquest report in respect of the dead body. Thereafter, he recorded the statements of P. Ws. Allah Bachayo, Ishaque, Saleh. Abdul Jabbar, Khaliqdinno, Younis, Uris: Soomar and Ahmed Khan. On 29 July 1973. The two appellants were arrested by the S.H.O.
From the house of one Boolo Junejo, which was bolted from inside, and the police party entered it by scaling over the wall. On interrogation by the S.H.O., appellant Alinawaz is stated to have taken the S. H. O. And Mashirs to an adjoining room and brought out a bundle containing a shirt, shalwar and knife, which were seized by the S H.O. As they were all b1bod--statned, and Mashirnarna of seizure was prepared. Thereafter, appellant Abdullah took the S.H.O. And the Mashirs to an abandoned house near--by and took out from under some Devi bushes a bundle containing a shirt, shalwar and a knife, all of which were stained with blood. The S. H. O. Also seized these articles and prepared Mashirnama. The various articles produced by the accused were sent by the S.H.O.
To the Chemical Analyser for report as to the origin of the blood stains thereon, On 31st July 1973, the statements of P.Ws. Ishaque, Khaliqdinno. Saleh and Abdul Jabbar were recorded under section 164, Cr. P. C. By the learned Civil Judge and F.C.M., Badin. Thereafter on 13th August 1973, the two appellants were challaned.
4. Appellant Ali Nawaz, in his statement under section 342, Cr. P. C. As, erred that there was deep- rooted enmity between him and the complainant party as he had filed a dacoity case and also a case under sec--tion 107, Cr. P. C., against the deceased, his father Ali Mohammad, Khaliqdinno and Uris. He has produced certified copies of the F.I.R. Lodged by him in the dacoity case and the order under section 112, Cr. P. C., passed in the proceedings under section 107, Cr. P. C. The stand of appellant Alinawaz is that he has been falsely implicated in the case on account of the above enmity and in retaliation for the cases filed by him against the complainant party. Appellant Abdullah has claimed that he ha; been falsely implicated because not only he is a friend of co- appellant, Alinawaz, but further he was a witness against the complainant party in the dacoity incident, in which he had received injuries. No defence was led by either of the appellants.
5. The autopsy on deceased Vikio Odhejo was performed by Dr. Jamil-ur-Rahman, who has testified that he found the following external injuries on his person:-- (1)Stab wound over the left side of the forehead 1--" x 1/5" x brain deep. The skull bone was cut through and through, (2)Incised wound on the pre-a uricular area of right ear 1" x 1/5" x skin deep. The cartilage of the ear was also cut.
(3)Incised wound on middle third right side of the head 2" x --" x scalp deep.
(4)Incised wound on the right shoulder girdle anteriorly 1 x --" x muscle deep. The patient was fully conscious. Injury No. I grievous and dangerous."
5. On internal examination, the Medical Officer found that the scalp, skull, brain and its membrane were cut under external injury No. 1. The formal lobe of the brain on left side was cut and full of blood, the right thorax was cut, the larynx and trachea were full of blood and secretions and theth blood vessels were cut. According to him, injure No. 1 was individually and the rest collectively were sufficient to cause Heath in the ordinary course of nature. All the injuries, according to the Medical Officer, bad been caused by some sharp cutting weapon, like a knife.
6. The Medical Officer also examined Vikio Malah and found the following injuries on his person, all of which appeared to have been caused by a sharp cutting weapon like a knife:--- (1)Stab wound on mid of the occiput -- " x --" x scalp deep.
(2)Stab wound on right side of the occiput --" x --" x scalp deep.
(3)Stab wound on back side of the left shoulder girdle, 1---" x 1" x muscle deep. The wound was of about 2" deep in posterio---anterior position and was bleeding profusely.
(4)Incised wound on posterior side of the left shoulder girdle medially 1" x --" x muscle deep.
(5)Incised wound on left scapular region 1" x --" x muscle deep, (6)Incised wound on upper third left side of the back 2" x --" x muscle deep (7)Incised wound on left shoulder girdle anteriorly 2" x --" x muscle deep.
(8)Incised wound just above the umblicus --" x 1/5" x muscle deep, (9)Incised wound over the bridge of the nose --" x 1/5" x skits deep "
7. The Medical Officer has opined that Injury No. 3 was dangerous in nature while the rest of the injuries were simple.
8, There are three different pieces of evidence connecting the appellants with the crimes for which they have been convicted, There is first of all against them the ocular testimony of as many as four witnesses, namely, injured Vikio Malah, Khaliqdinno, Abdul Jabber and Saleh. The presence at the incident of P. W. Vikio Malah cannot he doubted by reason of the numerous injuries found by the Medical Officer on his person. He has testified that on the day of the incident he and his cousins, Saleh Mohammad and Soomar, went to see a show at Rex Cinema, where he found that deceased Vikie Odhejo also was present for the same purpose. He has further testified that at the time of the inter--val, at about 8-30 p. m., he and Vikio Odhejo came out and went to a cart vendor, for the purpose of eating Kababs, and just as they were taking the Kababs, the two appellants turned up, with open knives in their hands, and both of them caused injuries to the deceased, upon which he intervened and tried to rescue the deceased, but the appellants attacked him and reused numerous injuries to him with their knives. The witness has gone on to state that both he and the deceased fell down upon receipt of the injuries at the hands of the two appellants. The incident, according to the witness, was seen by Abdul Jabbar, Saleh, Khaliqdinno and others, and upon their arrival, the appellants ran away while he and the deceased were removed in a Tonga by first informant Ali Mohammed and Khaliqdinno to the Hospital. The witness belongs to a different caste from the deceased and the other eye-witnesses and nothing has been brought out from his evidence which tends to discredit his testimony. Mr. Mohammad Hayat Junejo. However, referred us to his admission in his 164 statement to the effect that Vikip Odhejo had met them at to Kazi Wah Bridge from where they all went to the Cinema and from this admission he sought to argue that not only the witness had made a false statement in asserting that they had accidentally met Vikio Odhejo in the Rex Cinema, but that there must have been a deep bond of friend--ship between the two Vikios, otherwise the deceased would not have accompanied them from Kazi Wah to the Rex Cinema and seen the Cinema show with them. We, however, are unable to find any substance in these contentions of the learned counsel. It is true that there is a contradiction between the 164, Cr. P. C. Statement of the witness and his evidence in Court as to where deceased Vikio met them, but we have taken note of the fact that the witness was giving evidence after almost 4 years of the incident and it is very likely that he had forgotten as to where Vikio Odhejo had met them. From the mere fact that Vikio Odhejo had accompanied Vikio MaIah from Kazi Wah to the Rex Cinema for the purpose of seeing a Cinema show no inference can be drawn that there was any special friendship or bond between the two Vikios. Both the Vikies were young men and it cannot be considered unusual or due to any special friendship if deceased Vikio Odhejo, on finding some of his co-villagers going to the Cinema, decided to accompany them. We are of the view that P. W. Vikio Malah has given a true account of the incident and that his evidence is convincing and consistent with the other testimony.
9. Strong support to the evidence of P. W. Vikio Malah is provided by the ocular testimony of P. Ws.
Khalikdinno, Abdul Jabbar and Saleh, who have testified that they had witnessed the fatal assault on the deceased and the murderous assault on P. W. Vikio Malah. The names of all these witnesses appear in the F.I.R, which was lodged within 45 minutes of the incident. Unfortunately, first informant Ali Mohammed the father of deceased Vikio Odhejo, could not be examined, as he died before he could be examined. Similarly the Kabab vendor also died before his evidence could be recorded.
Mr. Mohammad Hayat Junejo assailed the evidence of these eye-witnesses on the grounds that they had given no valid reason for gathering at Drivers Hotel, that according to the Tapedar it was not possible to see the incident from the drivers hotel and that according to the Mashirnama of the scene of offence, the drivers hotel was found closed when the police arrived at the scene of offence. He has further described P. W. Khaliqdinno as a person hostile to the appellants because appellant Alinawaz had filed a dacoity case against him and others of the complainant party. Now, as regards the first objection of Mr. Mohammad Hayat Junejo, P. W. Khaliqdinno has stated that one Noor Mohammad Turk had to pay him an amount of Rs: 30, on account of work for two days which he had performed for him, that he met the said Noor Mohammad near the bus stand. And on his making demand of his dues from Noor Mohammed Turk, the latter took him to the drivers hotel and asked him to wait there while he left for bringing the amount due to the witness. This does not appear to us to be an unusual course. It is true that the witness-had admitted that Noor Mohammad Turk did not return till the incident had occurred, but since the incident occurred shortly after P.W Khaliqdinno had come to the drivers hotel, and thereafter Khaliqdinno assisted first informant Ali Mohammed in taking the deceased and injured to the hospital, there is satisfactory explanation why Khaliqdinno could not recover this dues Noor Mohammad Turk on the, day of the incident. P. W. Khaliqdinno has candidly admitted his relationship to deceased Vikio Odhejo and first informant Ali Mohammad. It was because of his relationship that he went and informed Ali Mohammad and then assisted him in taking the deceased and injured to the Hospital.
1t is true that in the F.I.R. Of the dacoity case, which was lodged by appellant Alinawaz on 17th June 1973, the name of Khako Odhejo transpires a --one of the culprits, but apart from the fact that it is not very clear whether this Khake Odhejo is the same person as P. W. Khaliqdinno, there is no evidence to show that any action was taken against P. W. Khaliqdinno or any other person from the complainant party on the basis of this F. I. R. On the other hand, it is stated in the discharge order passed in the 107, Cr. P. C. Proceedings against the complainant party that an enquiry was held by the D.S.P. In the report filed by appellant Alinawaz under sections 395 and 397, but no proof could be obtained against accused named in the F. I. R. And consequently no action on that F.I.R. Was taken, but nevertheless 5 members of the complainant party were sent up under section 107, Cr. P.
C. These 107 Cr. P. C. Proceedings also ended in discharge, vide discharge order produced by accused Alinawaz himself.
10. Even if the evidence of P. W. Khaliqdinno be viewed with suspicion on account of his relationship with the deceased and the fact that his name transpires in the F.I.R. Of the dacoity case filed by Alinawaz and the 107 Cr. P. C. Proceedings taken against the complain-- ant party by reason of the dacoity report, no such infirmity attaches to the evidence of P. Ws. Abdul Jabbar and Saleh. Both these witnesses belong to a different caste from that of the complainant party and neither any relationship exists between them and the complainant party nor there is any evidence of ill-will or enmity between them and the appellants. P. W. Abdul Jabbar is a Hotel keeper and his evidence is to the effect that be was going to his friend, Moosa Malah near Rex Cinema when he was called by P. W. Saleh, who was sitting at the Drivers hotel along with P. W. Khaliqdinno, and they offered him tea, whereupon he sat with them and was taking tea, when they saw the incident, Mr. Mohammad Aayat Junejo assailed the evidence of this witness on the ground that it is unlikely that the witness, who was himself a hotel-keeper would leave his hotel merely for the purpose of seeing his friend, Moosa, Malah, whom ultimately he did not meet. There is, however, no evidence to show that Abdul Jabbar was working alone at his hotel and did not have a Manager or some employees, who could look after this hotel during his absence. The witness, in our opinion, has satisfactorily explained why he did not meet Moosa Malah on the day of the incident, because in the meanwhile he was offered a cup of tea by P. Ws. Saleh and Khaliqdino, and while they were having tea, the tragic incident of assault on the deceased and. P .W. Vikio Malah took-- place.
11. Evidence of P. W Muhammad Saleh is similar that of P. W. Abdul Jabbar. He too was passing by Rex Cinema when he was called by P. W. Khaliqdino and was invited to a cup of tea. This witness has a fuel stall about a furlong away from the vardat at and he had gone to the Drivers hotel to get the sale amount for fuelwood which he had sold to his customers. As he knew P. W. Khaliqdino, the latter invited him to a cup of tea and he accepted, We find nothing unusual in such course of conduct. We also find no substance in the contention of Mr. Muhammad Hayat Junejo that from the Drivers hotel it is not possible to see the scene of offence, since according to the witnesses they were not sitting in the privets hotel but at a table which was placed outside the hotel. As the incident occurred during the hot month of July, it would have been most unusual for the witnesses to have sat inside the hotel. The sketch of the vardat, prepared by the Tapedar, also shows that the table at which the witnesses were sitting was in front of the drivers hotel and from this place the scene of offence was visible.
12. We also are of the view that nothing turns on the fact that the drivers hotel was closed at the time the police visited the scene of offence. The exact time of the visit of the police to the vardat is not indicated in the record. However, it must have been quite sometime after the F.I.R. Was recorded at 9-15 p. m., since the S.H.O. First went to the Hospital, where he prepared Mashirnama of the injuries on the two Vikios, gave a letter to the Medical Officer for their treatment and then recorded the statement of P. W. Vikla Malah. All this must have taken quite sometime and the S.H.O.
Accordingly must have reached the scene of offence quite late at night. It is thus natural that the hotel was found closed at the time. There is, however, reliable and convincing evidence that at the time of the incident which was during the interval of the show at the; Rex Cinema, the hotel was open.
13. Mr. Muhammad Hayat Junejo also submitted that there is contradiction between the ocular testimony and the medical evidence, for whereas according to the ocular testimony the deceased was eating Kababs when he was attacked, the medical evidence shows that only fluid mixed blood was found in his stomach at the time of the post-mortem. We are of opinion that is no real contradiction between the ocular evidence and the medical evidence, because according to the ocular evidence, the deceased and P.W. Vikio Malah had just ordered the Kababs and were just about to eat the same when they were attacked.
14. Assurance to the ocular testimony is provided by the recovery of incriminating articles at the pointation of the two appellants. S.H.O. Allah Bux has testified that he had arrested the appellants on 29th July, 1973, from the house of one polo Junejo, which was bolted from inside and on his interrelating the two appellants, appellant Alinawaz led him to an adjoining broken room and produced before him a bundle containing a shirt, shalwar and a knife, all of which were blood- stained, and similarly, appellant Abdullah led them to a nearby abandoned house and from the Devi bush he took out a bundle which contained a shirt, shalwar and a knife, all of which were blood-stained. The S.H.O. Is fully supported by Mashir Moulabux, in whose presence the appellants were arrested and produced the incriminating articles. The Mashir is a Mugheri by caste and a cattle dealer. He is a an independent and disinterested witness who has no motive for falsely implicating the appellants. We consider that he has given truthful evidence. The clothes and the weapons produced by the two appellants were sent to the Chemical Examiner to the Government, whose report is to the effect that human blood was detected on all these articles. The appellants have not explained the presence of human blood on these articles.
15. A further circumstances which connects the appellants with the offence is their conduct.
According to S. H. O. Allah Bux and Mashir Moula Bux, the two appellants were found together in the house of Boolo Junejo, which house was bolted from inside and hence the police had to gain entry in the house by scaling over the walls. The appellants would not have hidden themselves in the house of another person and bolted the house from inside in broad daylight unless they were attempting to flee or escape from the police. Their conduct thus is a further circumstance indicating their guilt.
16. We are accordingly satisfied that there is sufficient and convincing evidence to establish the guilt of the two appellants. In consequence of the vicious attack by the two appellants, on the deceased and P. W. Vikto Malah, the former lost his life and the latter had to remain as an indoor patient in the hospital for about a month. Looking to the nature of the injuries sustained by the deceased and P. W. Vikio Malah, it is clear that the intention of the two appellants in making the attack was to kill deceased Vikios Odhejo and to attempt to kill P. W. Vikio Malah. We, therefore, consider that both the appellants have rightly been convicted of offence under section 302/34 and 307/34, P. P. C. We are however, of the view that the appellants could not have been convicted and sentenced under section 324/34 P. P. C., since this offence merges in the more serious offences of murder and attempt to murder, of which the two appellants were convicted.
17. There remains only the question of sentence. Mr. Muhammad Hayat Junejo pleaded for the award of lesser sentence to the two appellants on three grounds. His first ground was that the prosecution had failed to indicate or at least to establish any motive and in the absence of motive, the appellants were entitled to the lesser penalty. In support of this contention, the learned counsel relied upon two decisions of this Court, one being in the case of Abdul Ghani v. The State (1977 P Cr.
L J 377) and the other in case of Noor Muhammad v. The State, being confirmation Case No. 34/1973, which is unreported. In the reported case, the motive given by the complainant was that a theft had been committed at the house of Abdul Haque and thought he suspected Lal Khan of having committed the theft, Lal Khan was let off and therefore Abdul Haque and his family members were nursing a grudge against Lal Khan. It was found that these allegations were baseless and therefore it was considered that the motive, as alleged, had no bearing on the happening in the case. In the circumstances the sentence of death was altered to imprisonment for life. In the unreported case reliance was placed on the observations made by Khamisani, J., in the cases reported in PLD 1959 Kar. 460. These observations were made in connection with the murder by a husband of his wife. It was found that a couple had led a happily married life for a long period of 22 years and since no motive was forthcoming for committing the crime, it was held that the case called for award of lesser penalty. The circum--stances in this case are totally distinguishable from these in the two cases relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellants.
The two appellants appeared to have made a pre-planned attack on the deceased and for this purpose had armed themselves with knives which they carried open in their hands. The savage nature of the attack on the deceased and P. W. Vikio Malah is apparent from the fact that the latter received as many as 11 injuries while the deceased was given four injuries. Furthermore, the motive for the crime is given in the F. I. R, which was to the effect that there was enmity between the complainant party and Muhammad deceased had previously been beaten and a false case of dacoity had been filed against the complainant party, but further attempts had been made on the lives of the first informant and the deceased. Unfortunately, this motive could not be established as the deceased. Vikio Odhejo, succumbed to his injuries and complainant also died before his evidence could be recorded. The mere fact that Moosa Memon, whose henchmen the two appellants alleged to have been not challaned, since there was no evidence to connect him with the crime, does not mean that the motive was false or was not proved. In any case, the dacoity case filed by appellant Ali Nawaz against the com--plainant party, which was found by the police, on investigation to be un--substantiated, indicates the enmity between the parties and this enmity could be the motive for the murderous assault on the deceased and his companion, Vikio Malah. It was pointed out by their Lordships of the Supreme Court in the case of Atta Muhammad v. State (1969 SCMR 502) that motive is after all a matter of speculation for what moves a person to take the life of another is within his special knowledge and does not constitute a necessary ingredient of the offence of murder". In Akhtar All v. The State (1968 SCM R 781) their Lordships of the Supreme Court repelled the contention that where motive was inadequate or non extent, an inference should be drawn that accused had no intention to kill, and held that "even without the avowed intention of the appellant it is clear that anyone causing such an injury could only have done it with the intention of causing death and no other intention". Their Lordships accordingly took the view that this was a case of a brutal and deliberate attack with the manifest intention of causing death and hence there was no scope left for giving a lesser sentence. There Lord--ships accordingly non- firmed the death sentence awarded to the accused in that case.
18. Mr. Muhammad Hayat Junejo next relied upon the decision of the Peshawar High Court in the case of Ghulam Hussain v. The State (PLD 1966 Pesh 255) In that case the view was taken that because the murder had been com--mitted in a busy market place, in broad daylight, there was a possibility of an altercation between the accused and the deceased, and because of this possibility, the sentence of death awarded to the accused by the trial Court was reduced to transportation for life. The facts of the instant case, however, are totally different. As already pointed out, both the appellants had come armed to the scene of offence, determined to attack deceased Vikio Odhejo. Neither injured Vikio Malah nor any of the other eye-witnesses to the incident make mention of any altercation between the appellants and the deceased prior to the attack. The evidence is to the effect that there was a savage and brutal attack on the deceased and later on P. W. Vikio Malah while they were actually eating Kababs in front of a Cinema. The possibility, therefore, of there having been an altercation between the parties before the assault can safely be ruled out.
19. It was finally contended by Mr. Muhammad Hayat Junejo that the case of appellant Ali Nawaz inasmuch as the former admittedly did not cause any fatal injury. He accordingly submitted that appellant Abdullah in the circumstances was entitled to the lesser penalty. In support of his contention, the learned counsel relied upon a decision of the Supreme Court of India, a judgment of our own Supreme Court and finally upon a D. B. Decision of this Court. In the case reported as Dalip Singh v. The State (AIR 1953 SC 364) of Punjab Vivian Bose, J., observed as follows:--- "In cases where the facts are more fully known and it is possible to determine who inflicted blows which were fatal and who took a lesser part, it is a sound exercise of judicial discretion to determine in the matter of punishment. It is an equally sound exercise of judicial discretion to refrain from sentencing all to death when it is evident that some would not have been if the facts had been more fully known and it had been possible to determine, for example who hit on the head or who only on a thumb or an ankle; and when there are no mesne of determining who dealt the fatal blow, a judicial mind can legitimately decide to award the lesser penalty in all the cases."
20. In Atta Mohammad's case, to which we have already referred on the point whether motive is a necessary ingredient of offence of murder the Supreme Court of Pakistan reduced the sentence of death awarded to one of the two appellants to transportation for life, on the ground that the other appellant had been awarded sentence of transportation for life and there was no real distinction between the cases of the two as there was neither any visible motive on the part of the appellant who had been awarded death sentence, nor was he shown to have taken leading part in the attack on the deceased, bat on the contrary the evidence was that both the appellants had given hatchet blows to the deceased, so that it would not be spelt out that the appellant who bad been awarded death sentence had caused more blows or that the blow cutting the neck of the deceased was caused by him. In the Karachi case, which is reported as Godho v. State (2), it was observed that where the fatal injury resulting in the death of the deceased was not attributable with certainty to one or the other two accused, the liability of the accused would be constructive, and under these circumstances, the ends of justice would be served by reducing the sentence of death to transpiration for life.
21. In the instant case, there is positive evidence that the forehead injury to the deceased, which was the fatal injury resulting in his death, was caused by appellant Alinawaz. Further, it was he who had filed the unsuccessful dacoity case against the complainant party. In the circum--stances, we think that a distinction could reasonably be made in the award of sentence to the two appellants.
As regards appellant Alinawaz, since he caused the fatal injuries to the deceased, we would confirm the sen--tence of death awarded to him and also the sentence awarded to him .For the offence under section 307/34, P.P.C. So far as appellant Abdullah is concerned, who admittedly did not cause any fatal injury to the deceased, we would substitute for the sentence of death awarded to him for they offence under section 302/34, P.P.C., a sentence of imprisonment for life. The fine imposed on him for the offence under section 307/34, P.P.C., is maintained. As regards the sentence awarded to the two appellants under section 32434 P.P.C., the same is set aside, as an offence under section 324/34 merges with the graver offences of murder and attempt to) commit a murder.