Eyewitness and common-object evidence sustained convictions; Section 149 liability applies without specific overt acts when participation is proved.

Trustworthy eyewitness and injured-witness testimony, supported by corroboration, sustained the findings of guilt; minor contradictions and delay did not discredit the prosecution case, and the convictions were upheld. Liability under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 was affirmed on proof of participation in an unlawful assembly and its common object, even without a specific overt act attributed to each accused. Concurrent findings of fact ordinarily do not warrant interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India absent perversity or grave error, and the appeals were dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the concurrent findings of guilt, based on eyewitness and corroborative evidence, warranted interference in appeal, and whether the appellants' participation in the unlawful assembly and common object was established.

Analysis: The prosecution evidence was found to be trustworthy, including the testimony of eyewitnesses and injured witnesses, and minor contradictions or delay did not discredit the case. The Court held that a member of an unlawful assembly may be liable under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 even if a specific overt act is not attributed to each accused, so long as active participation and the common object are proved. The Court also accepted that concurrent findings of fact ordinarily do not call for interference under Article 136 of the Constitution of India absent perversity or grave error.

Conclusion: The convictions were upheld and the appeals were dismissed.

---