Short Note : On 16-4-1974 when Gulabsingh (PW1) and his wife Balkibai (PW2) returned from the market they found Mst. Medabai lying unconscious in an injured condition. Gulabsingh reported the incident to PW10 Nansiya and PW3 Richha, Choukidar. Medabai was taken in a bullock cart by Gulabsingh (PW1) to the police station Silavad where the first information report Ex.P/1 was lodged. The injured was sent to the civil hospital but ultimately on 18-4-1974 Medabai succumbed to the injuries. After investigation the appellant along with two other accused was put up for trial for having committed the murder of Medabai. He denied the commission of any offence. The learned trial Judge found that the appellant alone was guilty of the offence charged with. He therefore convicted and sentenced the appellant as aforesaid. Aggrieved by this the appellant has preferred the present appeal through Jail. Held : The fact that Medabai died a homicidal death has been proved by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt by the testimony of Dr. Bakshi (PW17). The prosecution case against the appellant mainly rests on the testimony of two eye-witnesses-Surlibai (PW9) aged about 6 years and Nansiya (PW 10) aged about 7 years. We have gone through the testimony of these two witnesses, PW 9 Surlibai though in her examination-in-chief deposed that she had witnessed the assault by the appellant on Medabai with an axe, she admitted in cross-examination that she did not notice the appellant assaulting the deceased. PW 10 Nansiya admitted in cross-examination that he was not acquainted with the appellant. In view of the age of these two witnesses and the discrepant statements made by them in-cross-examination it would not, in our opinion, be safe to act on their testimony alone for holding the appellant guilty of the offence charged with. Learned counsel for the State conceded that apart from the testimony of these two eye-witnesses the prosecution have not brought on record any incriminating circumstance against the appellant. In these circumstances the conviction of the appellant for the offence charged with, cannot in our opinion, be sustained in law. Appeal allowed.