Counsel submitted that in the common object of the unlawful assembly, of which the appellant were members, could not have been to cause death of the death of the deceased but the same could have been at the highest, to cause simple hurt.

In Courts view, the submission had been made only to be rejected as the definite persecution case as well as the evidence is that he five accused persons, including the four appellant, came together in a jeep ,one of whom was armed with the gun and other s with lathis, after arriving at the place of occurrence, they abused members of prosecution party and on protest being made by them, accused fired at the deceased who succumbed to the injuries.

Whereas the appellants pelted stones upon the deceased and PW 2 ,and threw Lathis upon them ,as a result of which they received several others injuries apart from the two injuries by firm arms inflected by accused upon the deceased and thereupon,they fled away together from the place of occurrence.

On these facts, Court had no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the common object of the unlawful assembly, of which the appellant s were members, was to cause death of the deceased and pursuant to that common object,one of the members of the unlawful assembly, namely accused inflected two fatal injuries upon the deceased by firm arms whereas any substance in this submission as well.

In View of the foregoing discussion, Court was of the view that that prosecution has succeeded in proving it's case beyond reasonable doubt and the High Court has not committed any error in upholding conviction s of the appellant s ,as such no interference was called for by Supreme Court.