( 1 ) THE appellant Mahadevappa has been convicted of murder of his wife Fakirawwa and his two year old son Ramalinga and of assaulting mahadevi (PW. 1) under Secs. 302 (two counts) and 324 of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and RI for one year, with a direction that the sentences should run concurrently, by the Principal sessions Judge, Belgaum, in SC. 69 of 1976. ( 2 ) THE prosecution case was that Basavannevva (PW. 2) was the first wife of the appellant, while Fakirawwa was his second wife. The two wives were living separately with their children in the same house in different portions as the two wives were not pulling on amicably. Mahadevi is the eldest daughter of Fakirawwa. At the time of the incident she was aged about 6 years. The eldest son of Fakirawwa was residing with his grand-mother in a different village. The last son of Fakirawwa, is one Ramalinga, aged about 2 years. ( 3 ) ON the night of 30-5-1976 Fakirawwa and her son Ramalinga were done to death and Mahadevi sustained injuries. Gurubasappa (PW. 3), a neighbour of appellant, came to know about this incident from Mahadevi the same night, but he did not inform any one. On the morning of 31-5-1976, it appears, Mahadevi went to the police outpost at Dodwad in the same village and reported to Lingayya, Head Constable (PW. 12) about the incident. Lingayya. noticing injuries on Mahadevi, sent her to Dr. Dhondiram (PW. 6), who examined her and found three injuries on her which were simple in nature. Lingayya went near the house of the appellant and found the door closed. He went into the house and found the dead-bodies and no one else present in the house. He came back to the out-post, wrote Ext. P23 and sent the same to Bailhongal police station. Chandrasekhar (PW. 13) Sub-Inspector of Police on receipt of Ext. P23, registered a case against the appellant for murder and for assaulting Mahadevi. He went to the spot and recorded the statements of some witnesses. Post-mortem was conducted on the two dead bodies by Dr. Dhondiram on 31-5-76. He noticed that Fakirawwa was pregnant at the time of her murder. He found a number of injuries on both the dead bodies and opined that the deaths were due to shock and haemorrhage. He went to the spot and recorded the statements of some witnesses. Post-mortem was conducted on the two dead bodies by Dr. Dhondiram on 31-5-76. He noticed that Fakirawwa was pregnant at the time of her murder. He found a number of injuries on both the dead bodies and opined that the deaths were due to shock and haemorrhage. Chandrasekhar arrested the appellant on 8-6-1976 at belavadi. He brought the appellant to Dodwad out-post where he made a statement as per Ext. P32 which led to the recovery of MO. 3 banian and MO. 2 sickle. These articles were found to be stained with human blood. ( 4 ) THE prosecution case was that the appellant had incurred a debt of Rs. 5000 to Rs. 6000 from a society. As he was not in a position to discharge the debt, he wanted to dispose of his lands but Fakirawwa did not agree. Therefore he committed her murder and of her son and intended to do away with Mahadevi but fortunately she sustained only some minor injuries. ( 5 ) ON a scrutiny of the evidence of the child witness Mahadevi (PW. 1) the learned Sessions Judge, comparing the same with other corroborating evidence, came to the conclusion that the appellant was the murderer. He did not place any reliance on the evidence of Shankar gouda (PW. 7) and Channagouda (PW. 8) relating to extra-judicial confession as he found that their evidence suffered from infirmities. He also discarded the evidence of recovery on the ground that the same was untrustworthy and bristled with improbabilities. ( 6 ) THE trial Judge has relied upon the evidence of a child witness of tender age of 6 years. He has taken into consideration some circumstances as corroborating the evidence of the child witness. In our opinion, the trial Judge has not scrutinised the evidence properly. The corroboration that is sought in fact is not there. In this connection we would like to quote a passage from "the Outlines of Criminal Law" p. 386, by Dr. He has taken into consideration some circumstances as corroborating the evidence of the child witness. In our opinion, the trial Judge has not scrutinised the evidence properly. The corroboration that is sought in fact is not there. In this connection we would like to quote a passage from "the Outlines of Criminal Law" p. 386, by Dr. Kenny, Downing Professor of the Laws of England, Cambridge university:" Children are a most untrustworthy class of witnesses, for, when of a tender age, as our common experience teaches us, they often mistake dreams for realitv, repeat glibly as of their own knowledge what they have heard from others, and are greatly influenced by fear of punishment by hope of reward, and by desire of notoriety. "when considering the evidence of child witnesses t'hese observations should not be lost sight of, although each case would depend upon its particular facts and circumstances. ( 7 ) HAVING regard to what has been stated above, we would like to examine the evidence of Mahadevi. If the prosecution case were to be accepted that the two wives of the appellant were living separately with their children in the same house and if at the time of the murder of Fakirawwa she was pregnant, the appellant could not have any grouse against fakirawwa. In our opinion, no motive has been proved and even if what has been suggested is accepted, the appellant could not have thought of murdering his wife and children. Mallappa (PW. 5) along with two others (not examined in this case) went to the house of the appellant at his instance to settle the disputes between the two wives and himself in regard to the sale of his lands for discharge of his debts. According to him the appellant told that the only way of discharging the debts he had incurred was by sale of the lands and Fakirawwa was not agreeable for the sale of the lands. When this proposal was put forward to Fakirawwa according to PW. 5 himself, Fakirawwa came forward with a proposal that she would discharge the entire debt by securing money from her parents within a month. However, Mauappa and otners settled the disute between the husband and wives stating that they should divide the lands between theselves and discharge the debt. When this proposal was put forward to Fakirawwa according to PW. 5 himself, Fakirawwa came forward with a proposal that she would discharge the entire debt by securing money from her parents within a month. However, Mauappa and otners settled the disute between the husband and wives stating that they should divide the lands between theselves and discharge the debt. Even if what Mallappa has stated is a true account, the appellant could not have any motive to murder his wife Fakirawwa and her children. If fakirawwa came forward to discharge the entire debt the appellant would have been very happy. If PW. 5 and other panchayatdars decided that they should divide the lands between themslves and share the liabilities equally even then the appellant could not have any motives at all. Incidentaly we may recall here the circumstances which we observed in the medical evidence. Fakirawwa was pregnant at the time of her murder and therefore, it is very clear than the appellant must have been in cordial terms with Fakirawwa. At any rate, the motive suggested by the prosecution has not been established in this case. ( 8 ) COMING to the direct testimony of Mahadevi, we are unable to agree with the trial Judge that her evidence is reliable. Fakirawwa and her young child were murdered at about midnight on 30-5-1976, when mahadevi sustained injuries. Mahadevi has stated that she was able to identify the appellant as he had put on the electric light. We closely examined the panchanama of the scene of offence. We are unable to get any material therein to support the evidence of Mahadevi that there was any electric light at all in the house. The neighoburs who have been examined in this case do not say that the house was electrified. Mahadevi has stated that she was assaulted by the appellant two or three times with a sickle. Apprehending that the appellant may further assault her, she pretended as if she was dead. The appellant being satisfied that she was dead went away from the house. She then went to the house of one Shiddappa and told him about the incident. In the house of shiddappa according to her, his wife gave her tea and thereafter she slept there. The appellant being satisfied that she was dead went away from the house. She then went to the house of one Shiddappa and told him about the incident. In the house of shiddappa according to her, his wife gave her tea and thereafter she slept there. In the morning Shiddappa asked her to go to the police station and accordingly she went to the out-post situated in the same village and narrated the incident to Lingayya, Head Constable, and thereafter she was sent to the Doctor. Her story itself is an incredible one. If her story were to be believed that she pretended to be dead, apprehending further assault from the appellant, she could not be a girl aged about 6 years. The fact remains that she was 6 years old at the time of the murder and therefore her story is a tutored one. Therefore the trial Judge was wrong in relying upon her evidence. ( 9 ) THE prosecution sought to adduce evidence to probabilise the story of Mahadevi by examining Gurubasappa (PW. 3 ). His version is that the girl came to his house and told him about the incident. He asked his wife at that odd hour to prepare tea and accordingly she prepared and gave tea to Mahadevi. Then he asked Mahadevi to sleep in his house and accordingly the girl slept there. According to him, in the early morning he went out from his house to answer calls of nature and by the time he returned the girl was not there. This evidence has been taken into consideration by the learned trial Judge as corroborating the evidence of Mahadevi. The learned Trial Judge has misread the evidence. The version of Mahadevi is that she went to the house of one Shiddappa and informed him about the incident. PW 3 has come forward with the story that the girl approached him that night and informed him about the incident. We realy do not understand how the evidence of PW. 3 corroborates the evidence of Mahadevi. PW. 3 has admitted in his evidence that at that time a number of persons in the village, including in the lane in which he was living, were sleeping outside their houses as it was summer. We realy do not understand how the evidence of PW. 3 corroborates the evidence of Mahadevi. PW. 3 has admitted in his evidence that at that time a number of persons in the village, including in the lane in which he was living, were sleeping outside their houses as it was summer. If Mahadevi informed this witness about the incident his normal conduct would have been to awake people sleeping near about the house of the appellant and tell them what he came to know from PW1. The Patel was living nearby. He did not inform him then, nor did he make any attempt in the next morning to inform him or the police, who were available in the village. He has stated that he was examined by the investigating Officer on Tuesday, a day after the inquest was held. Therefore, even on his own testimony no Court could place any reliance. ( 10 ) PW. 12 has stated that on the morning of 31-5-76 PW. 1 informed him about the incident. The report Ex. P. 23 is not a statement made by pw. 1. No doubt, he has stated that the information contained thereto, was given to him by PW. 1. It may be that he did not take her thumb impression as she was a child. PW. 12 does not even say that the girl told him that the appellant was the person that committed the murders and assaulted her. That being so, his evidence cannot be considered as evidence corroborating the evidence of PW. 1. ( 11 ) IN the first place we are satisfied that the story given by PW. 1 is a tutored version. In the second place, there is no corroboration to her evidence. Generally speaking, the evidence of a child witness requires corroboration in some material particulars implicating the accused. In the Indian Evidence Act, there is no such provision and the evidence is made admissible whether corroborated or not. Once there is admissible evidence a Court can act upon it; corroboration, unless required by statute, goes only to the weight and value of the evidence. It is a sound rule in practice not to act on the uncorroborated evidence of a child, whether sworn or unsworn, but this is a rule of prudence and not of law. On a scrutiny of evidence of the child PW. It is a sound rule in practice not to act on the uncorroborated evidence of a child, whether sworn or unsworn, but this is a rule of prudence and not of law. On a scrutiny of evidence of the child PW. 1, we are convinced that no reliance could be placed on her evidence and that the corroboration sought to her evidence, equally in our opinion, is an evidence on which no reliance could be placed. ( 12 ) WHAT remains to be considered in this case are two circumstances, viz. , one relating to recovery of a sickle and a banian which were stained with human blood and another, the evidence relating to extra-judicial confession said to have been made by the appellant to pws. 7 and 8. The learned trial Judge, after a careful examination of the evidence relating to recovery of the articles, has rejected that evi- dence, in our opinion, rightly. We may point out that we have seldom come across any criminal case, more so in a murder case, without there being evidence relating to recovery of the weapon said to have been used inithe commission of the offence and of blood-stained clothes. The sickle in this case was recovered from the pump-house of the appellant some 8 or 9 days after the murder. There is evidence in this case that the appellant was staying in that house. The investigating Officer, having come to know of this, ought not to have failed to search the said pump house at an early date. There is no evidence in this case that mo. 2 was the weapon that was used for 4he commission of the offence therefore, the recovery of this weapon, even assuming to be true, cannot have any connection with 'the crime. The evidence relating to recovery of the banian MO. 3 from the field of one Rudregowda has no significance for the simple reason there is no evidence that at the time of the commission of the murder the appellant was wearing the vary banian. ( 13 ) COMING to the evidence relating to extra-judicial confession said to have been made by the appellant to PWs. 7 and 8, the said two persons belonged to different villages tar away from the village of the appellant and more or less they were strangers to the appellant. We find the same to be lacking in credence. ( 13 ) COMING to the evidence relating to extra-judicial confession said to have been made by the appellant to PWs. 7 and 8, the said two persons belonged to different villages tar away from the village of the appellant and more or less they were strangers to the appellant. We find the same to be lacking in credence. PW. 7, a boy of 22 years, when the appellant was working in his field, approached him and requested him for food. This witness took him to his house, where he gave him food and then he confessed before him, not in a straight forward manner but on his questioning him that he committed the murder of his wife. His conduct in not telling this information to any one itself is sufficient to hold that he is not a reliable witness. Similar is the evidence of PW. 8, who has stated that when he was sitting in the Math the accused went to him and confessed before him and then he asked him to go away from there and thereafter he kept quiet. This also does not infuse any confidence. The evidence of extra-judicial confession in the very nature of things is a weak piece of evidence, and invariably we find such evidence being collected in cases of this nature. As already pointed out, the learned Sessions Judge has not placed any reliance on this piece of evidence. If these pieces of evidence are discarded, there is nothing left in the case to point to the guilt of the appellant. ( 14 ) IN the result, we allow this appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence passed against the appellant and acquit him. We direct that he be set at liberty forthwith. --- *** --- .