JUDGMENT H.C.P. Tripathi, J. - This appeal is directed against a judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bijnor, dated September 24, 1962 convicting and sentencing the appellants under different sections of the Indian Penal Code to various terms of imprisonment. All the appellants have been convicted and sentenced to one years R. I. respectively under Sections 452 and 323 read with Section 149 I.P.C. Abdul Ghani, Qasim, Wali Mohammad, Nisar Ahmad and Habid appellants have been convicted also under Section 147 I.P.C. and sentenced to one years R. I. Ghuiam Rasool and Rashid have been convicted and sentenced to two years R. I. under Section 148 I.P.C. They have also beer, convicted and sentenced to two years R. I. under Section 324 I.P.C. Rashid has further been convicted and sentenced to four years R. I. under Section 303 I.P.C. All the sentences passed against the appellants under various counts have been directed to run concurrently. 2. Smt. Salma, wife of Ghuiam Panch-tan, and appellant Abdul Ghani and his sons Ghuiam Rasool and Qasim are residents of village Sardhani, P.S. Kotwali, and their houses are adjacent to each other. The Kotha of Abdul Ghani adjoins the western-half of the southern wall of Ghuiam Panchatans house and the eastern half of the said southern wall divides the Sahan of the two and is not very high. On December 2, 1961 at about 10 A.M. Smt. Salma was opening A Tak in the eastern half of her southen wall. Abdul Ghani and his, sons resented it and protested. Smt. Salma asserted her right of ownership over the wall and then Abdul Ghani and his two sons, viz., Ghuiam Rashid and Kasim, jumped over the wall came in the Sahan of Salma and started abusing and beating her. Her cries attracted Mohammad Abbas, Jabbar Husain, Rahmatullah and Abdul Qayum who repremanded Abdul Ghani for indulging in an unnecessary auarrel. Meanwhile Habib, Sadiq, Rashid, Nisar and Wali Mohammad came and sided with Abdul Ghani and started beating Smt. Salma and her supporters. Rashid and Ghuiam Rasool were said to have been armed with knives while others were armed with lathis. Ghuiam Rasool was alleged to have caused iniuries by knife to Mohammad Abbas while Rashid caused hurt by knife to Abdul Qayum and Rahmat Ullah. On the intervention of the villagers, the assailants then went away. 3. Rashid and Ghuiam Rasool were said to have been armed with knives while others were armed with lathis. Ghuiam Rasool was alleged to have caused iniuries by knife to Mohammad Abbas while Rashid caused hurt by knife to Abdul Qayum and Rahmat Ullah. On the intervention of the villagers, the assailants then went away. 3. A written report of the incident was lodged at P. S. Kotwali by Mohammad Abbas on December 2, 1961 at 10 A.M on the basis of which a case was registered. In this report all the appellants except Wali Mohammad and Nisar Ahmad, and one Mohammad Siddiq, who has been acquitted, were named as the assailants. 4. S. I. Rajiuddin proceeded to these scene of occurrence immediately, prepared the site plan (Ex. Ka. 9) and found the marks of opening of a Tak in the eastern half of the southern wall at point X shown in the site plan. He also found blood lying inside the Sahan and took sample of it. He also recovered the blood-stained clothes of the injured and sent them to the Chemical Examiner and Serologist for their report. He interrogated the witnesses and after completing the investigation, sent up the appellants along with Mohammad Siddiq for trial. 5. The appellants denied the various charges framed against them and set up a counter version of the incident. According to them at about 9 A.M. on December 2, 1961 Chhiddan, Iqbal, Afzal and Ghuiam Abbas were digging the Purdah wall of Abdul Ghani from the side of his house toppling down. Ghuiam Rasool when protested, was beaten. A report of this incident was lodged at the police station at 11 A.M. (Ex. Kha. 10) Subsequently at 10 A.M. when appellants Rashid, Nisar and Wali Mohammad were returning from the jungle and had reached in front of the house of Smt. Salma, they were attacked by Husain Ahmad, Abdul Qayum, Rahmat Ullah, Chhiddan, Iqbal, Nazar Mehadi and Zabbar. Rahmat Ullah was armed with a knife and lathi, Abdul Qayum was armed with a spear. Rahmat Ullah attacked with knife and Abdul Qayum with his spear whereupon Rashid snatched away the knife of Rahmat Ullah and in self-defence injured him and others. Wali Mohammad and Nisar also used their lathis in order to protect themselves. Smt. Salma and Abbas had intervened in this marpit and they had also received injuries. Rahmat Ullah attacked with knife and Abdul Qayum with his spear whereupon Rashid snatched away the knife of Rahmat Ullah and in self-defence injured him and others. Wali Mohammad and Nisar also used their lathis in order to protect themselves. Smt. Salma and Abbas had intervened in this marpit and they had also received injuries. A report of this incident was also lodged on behalf of the appellants the same day (Ex. Kha. 8). The appellants also examined Abdul Wahid, Sabbir and Wahid Hussain in their defence and in support of their version of the incident. 6. Rahmat Ullah, Abdul Qayum, Abbas, Jamal Husain and Kanij Fatima were injured on the side of the complainant while Ghuiam Rasool, Abdul Rashid, Wali Mohammad and Nisar Ahmad had received injuries from the side of the appellants. The statement of Dr. Mehrotra, Medical Officer, Sadar Hospital, Bijnore, who had examined all the injured persons, was tendered in evidence by the prosecution and is (Ex. Ka. 14). From a perusal of it appears that Rahmat Uljah had received one punctured wound in his abdominal cavity which was a dangerous injury and his dying declaration was recorded. Abdul Qayum had two simple incised wounds and one simple injury caused by teeth bite. Abbas had one simple incised wound on his left arm. Zabar Husain had two simple lacerated wounds caused by some blunt weapon. Kanij Fatima had two simple lacerated wounds caused by some blunt weapon. On the side of the appellants, Ghuiam Rasool had one lacerated wound, one abrasion and one swelling all caused by some blunt weapon. Abdul Rashid had one lacerated wound, two contusions, two incised wounds, in abrasion and one swelling. Wali Mohammad had two lacerated wounds, two contusions and two abrasions caused by some blunt weapon. Nisar Ahmad had one lacerated wound and two contusions. Thus we find that on the side of the complainant five persons were injured and had received 9 injuries in all. On the side of the appellants four persons were injured and they had received a total number of 22 injuries. All these injuries were simple, except the stab wound received by Rahmat Ullah which in the opinion of the doctor, was dangerous to life. 7. At the trial, Abbas, Jawad Husain, Nazar Taki, Rahmat Ullah, Kanij Fatima and Qayum were examined as eyewitnesses of the occurence. All these injuries were simple, except the stab wound received by Rahmat Ullah which in the opinion of the doctor, was dangerous to life. 7. At the trial, Abbas, Jawad Husain, Nazar Taki, Rahmat Ullah, Kanij Fatima and Qayum were examined as eyewitnesses of the occurence. The other evidence produced in the case was of a formal character. The prosecution also tendered the reports of the Chemical Examiner and the Serologist which are Exs. Ka. 15 and Ka. 16. 8. The lower court after an appraisal of the evidence had convicted the accused as indicated above. 9. There can be no doubt that on the date and at the time suggested by the prosecution, an incident had taken place in which both the parties indulged in marpit resulting in injuries on both the sides. The only question which arises for consideration in a case of the present nature is as to where and in what manner this incident did take place and as to which party was the aggressor? Out of the two versions put forward by the parties the trial court had rejected the defence version and in my opinion for good reasons. I do not, therefore, consider it necessary to discuss the defence case in detail. The rejection of the defence story, however, does not automatically prove the prosecution case which has to be judged on the basis of the prosecution evidence. 10. Having given my most anxious consideration to the statements of the prosecution witnesses and the circumstances arising on the record, I have no doubt that the prosecution case suffers from serious infirmities and it will not be safe to convict the appellants on the basis of evidence furnished by parties and witnesses who do not appear to have any regard for truth. 11. The learned trial judge, in his elaborate judgment, has made the following observations. "All this leads to the inference that the report had been lodged with prior consultation." "It may further be pointed out that in the report only 6 persons have been named among the accused persons and there is no mention of Wali Mohd. and Nisar Ahmad." "It was with some purpose this their names were omitted." "It is thus clear that designed ; the names of the two Wali Mohd. and Nisar Ahmad." "It was with some purpose this their names were omitted." "It is thus clear that designed ; the names of the two Wali Mohd. ari Nisar Ahmad, were omitted from the F.I.R. and the only purpose appear; to be to show that the aggressors were the accused persons and the complainant as also his party were innocent in the matter." "The statements of the prosecution witnesses that the accused persons armed with lathis and knife raided the house of Smt. Salma with any prior concert to beat her and others who might come to her rescue, is not correct." "The nature of the injuries would be the determining factor as to how actually the marpit started, because the direct testimony of the witnesses is tainted and due to political rivalry each party is throwing the burden on the other." "Thus four persons on the side of the accused received as many as 20 injuries', which had been caused by blunt weapon like lathi. If the accused had come with a prior concert and armed with lathis and knife, they would have been successful in causing more injuries to the complainant and his party men. But the facts are otherwise. The injuries of the accused persons are more in number." "Rahmat Ullah is a liar." 12. In spite of all these observations which are highly damaging to the prosecution case, the learned Sessions Judge, ultimately relying on the recovery of the blood-stained earth from the Sahan of Smt. Salma and also on her statement, held that the appellants were the aggressors. I find myself unable to agree with his conclusions. 13. Smt. Salma alias Kanij Fatima is equally a partisan witness as the ether prosecution witnesses were and whose testimony has been rejected by the trial court. She deposed that Ghuiam Rasftol, Abdul Ghani and Q.asim asked her not to dig the wall and when she did not desist they entered her house. Ghuiam Rasool had a knife while the others had lathis and all the three began : to beat her with lathis and fists. She had received two lacerated wounds only. She denied that the marpit did take place outside her house on the road. It is not safe to rely on her solitary statement when she is apparently a partisan witness. 14. She had received two lacerated wounds only. She denied that the marpit did take place outside her house on the road. It is not safe to rely on her solitary statement when she is apparently a partisan witness. 14. The other circumstance, viz., the recovery of the blood-tained earth which has been taken into account by the learned Sessions Judge for fixing place of the incident as inside Sahan of Smt. Salma also does not stand the test of scrutiny. A number of blood-stained clothes from the person of the injured were taken into possession by the police and sent to the Chemical Examiner, along with the blood-stained earth from the place of occurence for his report. The Serologist reported that the blood stains on the earth were disintegrated and therefore their origin could not be determined. Therefore, it is not possible to hold conclusively that, the blood-stained earth which was sent to the Chemical' Examiner contained human blood. On the other hand, from the report of the Serologist it appears that the shirt of Smt. Salma (item No. 48) was stained not with human blood, but with the blood of a bird. This has destroyed the significance of the recovery of blood-stained earth from the scene of occurence. In face of the Serologists report, it cannot he held that the blood-stained earth was necessarily stained with human blood and not with the blood of some bird or animal. 15. The presence of large number of injuries on the side of the appellants which are more numerous than those on the side of the complainant, is also a pointer to the fact that they were not the aggressors. Had they gone in side the house of Smt. Salma determined to fight there is no reason why they should have got worsted in the incident. 16. It is true, that it is the duty of a court to try to disengage truth from falsehood, and where it appears clear that a marpit had taken place and both parties had received injuries, a serious attempt should be made to try to find the real position. But it is also true that where the grain of truth is lost in mass of falsehood, there is no other option for a court of law but to acquit. But it is also true that where the grain of truth is lost in mass of falsehood, there is no other option for a court of law but to acquit. In the circumstances enumerated above, it is impossible to come to a definite conclusions as to the manner in which the .incident started and as to which party was the aggressor. The benefit of doubt must, therefore, go to the appellants. 17. The appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence of the appellants are set aside. They are on bail. Their bail bonds are discharged. They need not surrender.