As per case facts, the appellants were convicted for offences under Sections 148, 323 read with Section 149, and 304 Part-2 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, ... arising from a land dispute in 1991 where an unlawful assembly allegedly attacked the prosecution party, leading to one death and injuries. The appellants appealed, arguing a lack of mens rea, use of common farm equipment in self-defense, absence of independent witnesses, and that their assembly was not unlawful. The question arose whether the accused persons formed an unlawful assembly with a common object to commit a crime, whether the weapons used were deadly, and if individual liability under Sections 304 Part-2 and 323 IPC was sustainable without Section 149 IPC. Finally, the Court found no evidence of premeditated intent for an unlawful assembly or common object, stating the incident was a sudden altercation. It ruled that common agricultural implements were not inherently deadly weapons under Section 148 IPC. Consequently, convictions under Sections 148 and 149 IPC were set aside for all. Appellant Nos. 2 and 3 were convicted only under Section 323 IPC, while appellant No. 4's conviction under Section 304 Part-2 IPC for causing the fatal injury was upheld, but without the aid of Section 149 IPC. Sentences were modified based on time already served.