Short Note : 1. The appeal by the accused-appellant is directed against the judgment dated 20.1.1977, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhabua in Sessions Trial No. 356 of 1976 convicting the appellant under Section 304 (Part I) IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years. 2. There is no legal evidence against the appellant on the basis of which it can be said that the injuries on the person of the deceased Ramchandra were caused by the appellant. Madi (PW-2) the widow of the deceased Rajia (PW-4) Kamji (PW-7) and Panjim (PW-6) were examined as eye witnesses to the occurrence by the prosecution, but they have not supported the prosecution case. They were allowed to be cross-examined by the prosecution. The learned Session Judge has found the appellant guilty on the basis of the first information report (Ex.P.13) lodged by the deceased Ramchandra wherein he stated that the injuries on his person were caused by the accused appellant. The learned trial Judge has also relied upon the statement of the deceased recorded by police during investigation. These are the only two pieces of evidence on which the conviction of the appellant is based. It is difficult to appreciate how the statement of the deceased Ramchandra recorded during the investigation by the police was admissible in evidence. It also unsafe to convict the appellant merely on the basis of the first information report lodged by the deceased Ramchandra. As there is no ocher evidence in the case the charge against the accused appellant has not been brought home beyond reasonable doubt and his conviction and sentence cannot be sustained. Appeal allowed.