JUDGMENT V. D. Misra, C. J.—This judgment will dispose of criminal appeals Nos. 66 and 67 of 1979 since they arise out of one judgment. 2. The appeals are directed against the judgment of Shri D. P. Sood, Additional Sessions Judge, Kangra Division at Dharamsala, convicting the appellants under Sections 302/34 and 397 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing each appellant to imprisonment for life under the first count and for seven years rigorous imprisonment under the second count. Both the appellants have also been fined Rs. 200 each under the first count. 3. This is a case of circumstantial evidence. The only circumstantial evidence against Bhagwan Singh appellant consists of a piece of cloth Ex. P-8 belonging to his bush-shirt and recovered from the place of incident, an inland letter Ex. P-13 recovered from his personal search, and recovery of knife Ex. P-10. The only circumstantial evidence against Bir Singh appellant is stated to be the recovery of knife Ex. P-l 1 at his instance. And now to the facts. 4. Milkhi Rani (deceased) was running a barbers shop in Una Bazar. His sons Jagdish and Sat Pal used to help him in his business. On 4th August, 1978 they closed the shop at about 9 P. M. after counting the days earning which came to Rs. 27. Rs 5 were spent -.during the day for snacks etc. while another sum of Rs. 5 was spent for buying cottonseeds for the cattle. Milkhi Ram with his son Jagdish left the shop for their village which was about 4 kilometers away. Sat Pal had gone back to the village during the day. On the way they were joined by one Surinder Kumar of their village. When they reached near khad of village Rampur, Jagdish and Surinder Kumar stopped to answer the call of nature while Milkhi Ram kept on walking with a bag containing cotton seeds. After about 10 minutes, Jagdish and Surinder resumed their journey. Jagdish saw Surinder Kumar to his house and then went to his own house. However, he was astonished not to find his father there. On enquiry he was told that his father had not yet come back to the house. Jagdish alongwith one Chhotu Ram went towards Una in search of Milkhi Ram. Jagdish saw Surinder Kumar to his house and then went to his own house. However, he was astonished not to find his father there. On enquiry he was told that his father had not yet come back to the house. Jagdish alongwith one Chhotu Ram went towards Una in search of Milkhi Ram. After covering a distance of about one furlong, they noticed the bag containing the cotton seeds lying on one side of the road. Jagdish, who was carrying a torch, looked around and noticed a puma Ex. P-2, handkerchief Ex. P-3, a pair of black shoes Ex. P-4, an old umbrella Ex. P-5, and two small cloth thailis (used as purses) belonging to his father, at various places. Soon he found his father lying dead in the bushes at a distance of about 25 feet from the road. Other persons including the Pradhan were sent for. Thereafter Jagdish went to Police Station Una and lodged his report Ex. P-A. 5. Sub-Inspector Madho Ram, Station House Officer of Police Station Una, came to the scene of crime. After inspecting the place, he took into possession various articles lying near about the dead body. He also got the dead body photographed and sent it for postmortem examination. 6. Dr. R. D. Sehra (P. W. 15) conducted the postmortem examination on 5th August, 1978. He found the following injuries on the dead body :— "1. Left eye brow on the outer side showed an incised wound 3 cm X 1/2 cm floor of which showed sharp margin bore partially. 2. On abdomen left side on the inferior border orbital of 12th rib 7 inches below left nipple line and 4-3/4" from the umblicus is seen an oblique kidneyed shaped wound with concavity facing upper and outer side. The wound is incised, margins irregular clear cut and blackish in colour size 2 cm X 3/4 cm penetrating to the abdominal cavity directions upward and medially. 3. Bruise 2" X 1-1/4” on the left inferior orbital margin on dissection fracture or Maxilla ascertained. On out section fracture of bridge of nose was found. All the wounds are antimortem in nature." He noticed that injury No. 2 had ruptured the liver. The injury to the liver was 2-1/2 cm X 4 cm. He opined that injury No. 2 was sufficient to cause death of the deceased in the ordinary course of nature. 7. On out section fracture of bridge of nose was found. All the wounds are antimortem in nature." He noticed that injury No. 2 had ruptured the liver. The injury to the liver was 2-1/2 cm X 4 cm. He opined that injury No. 2 was sufficient to cause death of the deceased in the ordinary course of nature. 7. On 5th August, 1978 at about 8.15 A.M., Bhagwan Singh appellant was produced before Assistant Sub-Inspector Hari Singh (P. W.I 3) by various persons. The appellant was being accused of a theft. The Assistant Sub-Inspector searched the person of the appellant and arrested him. The search resulted in recovery of Rs. 17 (one currency note of Rs. 10, one currency note of Rs. 2, and three currency notes of one rupee denominations each). Two eight annas, three four annas, and one three paise coins were also recovered. Bush shirt Ex. P-2, worn by the appellant, was also taken into possession since it was suspected of having blood stains. An inland letter Ex. P-13 was recovered from the pocket of the bush shirt. These were duly made into parcels and sealed. 8. When the Sub-Inspector came back to the police station at about 7.30 P. M. on 5th August, 1978, he interrogated Bhagwan Singh and arrested him in the murder case. He went to village Sherpur alias Thata in District Hoshiarpur and at about 3.00 A. M. (mid-night) arrested Bir Singh appellant. He was found wearing Chadar Ex. P-12 which was taken into possession since it was suspected to be blood stained. On 6th August, 1978, the Investigating Officer obtained the remand of the appellants. On 7th August, 1978 he made an application for holding an identification parade of Bir Singh appellant. This appellant refused to get himself identified. 9. On 13th August, 1978, during interrogation, Bhagwan Singh made a disclosure statement offering to get a knife recovered from underneath the tahli trees (Ex. PC). Bir Singh appellant also made a disclosure statement offering to get a knife recovered from the nor then side of tahli trees (Ex. PD). Thereafter knives Ex. P-10 and Ex. P-ll were got recovered by Bhagwan Singh and Bir Singh appellants respectively. Since they were suspected to be blood stained, they were converted into sealed parcels. 10. PC). Bir Singh appellant also made a disclosure statement offering to get a knife recovered from the nor then side of tahli trees (Ex. PD). Thereafter knives Ex. P-10 and Ex. P-ll were got recovered by Bhagwan Singh and Bir Singh appellants respectively. Since they were suspected to be blood stained, they were converted into sealed parcels. 10. All the bloodstained articles were sent to the Chemical Examiner and after receiving his report, the appellants were charge sheeted for the offences of murder and robbery. 11. The defence of the appellants was one of complete, denial. They submitted that they are the victims of suspicion and the Investigating Officer has fastened this false case on them. 12. In order to prove that Bhagwan Singh appellant was wearing bush-shirt ;Ex. P-20 and had been seen at Una, the prosecution examined Shri Resham Lal (P. W. 4). He is a milk seller. He states that he had seen the appellants at Una at about 10 P. M. on 4th August, 1978, the night of the murder. He had met them near the building of the Forest Department and had seen them in the street light. Admittedly, he did not know the accused earlier nor he has any reason to remember them. Bhagwan Singh appellant was not put up for identification. The witness admits that the next time he saw Bhagwan Singh was at the police station at 9 A. M. on 5th August, 1978 when this appellant was in the police lock up. Why did he go to the police station is a mystery. Why did the police not put up Bhagwan Singh for identification is another mystery. This witness, who had casually seen the appellants in the street light, cannot be depended upon about the identity of the appellants. 13. The prosecution also examined Dalip Chand (P. W. 10) to show the presence of the appellants in Una on the fateful night. This witness runs a bakery shop at Una though he lives in a village. He swears that he had walked with the appellants on the road towards Santokhgarh when he was coming back to his village on that night. Bhagwan Singh appellant is said to have asked the witness about the distance to Santokhgarh. They also asked him where they could take their dinner, and the witness pointed out towards Una. He swears that he had walked with the appellants on the road towards Santokhgarh when he was coming back to his village on that night. Bhagwan Singh appellant is said to have asked the witness about the distance to Santokhgarh. They also asked him where they could take their dinner, and the witness pointed out towards Una. The appellants are said to have turned back to Una thereafter. 14. Admittedly the appellants were not known to him and this was the only time when he had seen them. Police recorded the statement of this witness after the lapse of 5 or 6 days of the incident. He was not called upon to identify appellant Bhagwan Singh since he was not put for any identification. There is no reason to believe him. 15. We cannot understand why the Investigating Officer did not decide to put up Bhagwan Singh appellant for identification. He knew that there were no eye witnesses. By the time Bhagwan Singh was arrested in this case, the Investigating Officer had not yet recorded the statement of any person in respect of the identity of the accused. It was, therefore, quite necessary for him to have warned Bhagwan Singh to keep his face muffled and thereafter put him up for identification. We will presently say something more about the nature of investigation. 16. Jagdish Chand, son of the deceased, was examined as P. W. 1. He had lodged the first information report Ex. P-A. in cross examination he categorically stated that he did not know the contents of the pockets of his father when he lodged the said report with the police. Now it may be noticed that it is specifically mentioned in the first information report that the deceased was carrying currency notes of Rs. 17 and some change. It has also specifically been recorded that one envelop addressed by Roshan Lai, maternal uncle of this witness, was in the pocket of the deceased. Now one of the circumstance against Bhagwan Singh is recovery of inland letter Ex. P-13, This letter was addressed by Roshan Lal to the deceased. In case Jagdish did not know what the deceased was carrying on his person, how did this fact find place in the first information report. This letter is dated 12th June, 1978. Now one of the circumstance against Bhagwan Singh is recovery of inland letter Ex. P-13, This letter was addressed by Roshan Lal to the deceased. In case Jagdish did not know what the deceased was carrying on his person, how did this fact find place in the first information report. This letter is dated 12th June, 1978. In other words, the deceased had received this letter about a month and a half before the occurrence. Why would he keep this letter all the time in his pocket ? Mr. Madan Gopal Chitkara, learned counsel for the appellants, contends that this is a clear case of planting. We agree with him. The first information report was not recorded when it purports to have been recorded but was manufactured much later on. It may also be noticed that according to the first information report the deceased had Rs. 17 currency notes and some change on his person. And this is the exact amount which is alleged to have been recovered from the person of Bhagwan Singh appellant when he was arrested on the morning of 5th August, 1978. Of course, by no streth of imagination this amount can be said to be of the deceased, but practically the exact robbed amount alleged to have been recovered from Bhagwan Singh appellant, does create a great suspicion about the bonafides of investigation. Before we can even suspect that this amount was the stolen one, we have to come to the conclusion that Bhagwan Singh was not carrying a single paisa of his own when he and his co-accused robbed the deceased. 17. We may now come straight to the question whether the piece of cloth Ex. P-8, which is a part of the bush shirt, Ex. P-20, was recovered from the scene of crime. It may now again be noticed that it is stated in the first information report that a piece of naswari cloth was found near about the dead body. The first thing to be noticed is that the scene of crime was photo graphed by Raj Kumar Sharma (P. W. 9), a photographer of Una. He had known the deceased. He categorically stated that he was taken to the place of occurrence at 7 or 8 A.M. on the morning of 5th August, 1978. He had taken the photographs from various angles. He had known the deceased. He categorically stated that he was taken to the place of occurrence at 7 or 8 A.M. on the morning of 5th August, 1978. He had taken the photographs from various angles. Two photographs show the dead body and the articles lying around it. Another two photographs show the thailis, Puna, and a handkerchief. Admittedly these photographs do not show the presence of any cloth like Ex. P-8 near the dead body. 18. Now the statement of Investigating Officer may be read. The Sub- Inspector had left for the scene of crime at about 3 A. M. on the night of crime after recording the first information report. He categorically stated that he had taken all the articles into possession which were found near about the dead body by about 4 A. M. He did so with the help of lanterns. It may be noticed that to begin with, he had talked about the use of lanterns and patromax, but then he had corrected himself and had talked about the use of lanterns only. It took another two hours for him to complete other formalities which were completed by 6 A. M. Now in case he had taken all the articles into possession, how could the photographer could have photographed these articles at 7 or 8 A. M. Either the articles were put back to enable the photo grapher to photograph the scene, or the Sub-Inspector is telling a lie that he had taken into possession all the articles by 4A.M. that night. Since the piece of cloth Ex, P-8 was a very vital piece of evidence, we decided to examine the photographer and the Investigating Officer to find out the truth. Both of them were examined by us on 24th November, 1980. 19. Raj Kumar photographer stated before us that a police constable had come to call him at his house. By that time the sun had already risen. His house was about a kilometer away from his shop and the scene of crime about three kilometers away. He had been photographing the scenes of crimes whenever the police had been summoning him. It was in the evening that he handed over the photographs to the Investigating Officer. He did not remember that there was any other piece of cloth lying near about the place where the dead body was lying. He had been photographing the scenes of crimes whenever the police had been summoning him. It was in the evening that he handed over the photographs to the Investigating Officer. He did not remember that there was any other piece of cloth lying near about the place where the dead body was lying. He categorically stated that he had photographed all the articles which could be seen near about the dead body. 20. Sub-Inspector Madho Ram could not explain to us why he did not get the alleged piece of cloth Ex. P-8 photographed when he was getting many other pieces of cloth lying near about the dead body photographed by Raj Kumar. He also insisted that he had not taken into possession the articles in question before the scene was photographed. He did not deny that the photographer had come to the scene of crime after the sun had risen. Of course, the Investigating Officer did tell us that he noticed the piece of cloth for the first time after the photographer had left. We cannot just swallow it. He had by 6 A. M. completed all the formalities and piece of naswari colour cloth had been mentioned in the inquest report. It was mentioned because, according to the report, it was suspected to belong to the assailant. The photographer, who had come at about 7 A. M., could have been shown this piece of cloth if it was at all lying there. In any case, even if he had noticed the piece of cloth after the photographer had left, why did he not call back the photographer ? We had asked him this question. He had no reply. He only stated that he got busy in the inquest report and so it slipped from his mind. It is a lie. Before us he denied taking into possession the articles by about 4 A.M. that night. We drew his attention to his statement recorded by the trial court. His answer was that he had taken the articles into possession at 6 A. M. after the sun had risen. If he is to be believed, he was telling a lie before the trial Court on his own showing. 21. In order to verify the facts, we looked into the case diary. We were shocked to see that the case diary does not bear the printed page numbers. If he is to be believed, he was telling a lie before the trial Court on his own showing. 21. In order to verify the facts, we looked into the case diary. We were shocked to see that the case diary does not bear the printed page numbers. The opening sheet did not bear the book number as well as the page number. It may be noticed that case diaries are to be maintained at the police station. It is so provided under Rule 25.53 of Chapter XXV of Volume III of Punjab Police Rules, 1934. Rule 25.54 requires that the case diaries shall ordinarily be submitted in Form 25 54 (1) and each sheet shall be numbered and stamped with the station stamp. Two or more copies have to be prepared by the carbon copying process by the officer conducting the investigation of the case. The numbering of the pages is very important. If the pages bear the printed serial number, then a check can be kept upon the investigation. Because of the printed number on the pages, no Investigating Officer will be in a position to change any page or insert any page. This not only saves the investigation from unnecessary criticism but also helps the courts. It ensures that the case diaries have been written regularly. If the pages have to be numbered by the Investigating Officer, then he can always change a page and give the same number to the newly inserted page. We may again record that the case diary before us has page numbers written in hand. They are consecutive numbers from page 1 onwards It means that they were never numbered even in hand for each day. They were being sent to the Inspector of Police. We may now read rule 25.54 : "25.54. (1) Case diaries shall ordinarily be submitted in Form 24.54 (1) and each sheet shall be numbered and stamped with the station stamp. Two or more copies, as may be ordered, shall be made by the carbon copying process by the officer conducting the investigation. The officer writing a case diary shall enter in such diary a list of statements, recorded under Section 161, Criminal Procedure Code, which are attached to such diary and the number of pages of which each such statement consists. The officer writing a case diary shall enter in such diary a list of statements, recorded under Section 161, Criminal Procedure Code, which are attached to such diary and the number of pages of which each such statement consists. (2) They shall be sent from the scene of investigation to the policy station without delay. (3) On arrival at the police station the number and date of each case diary shall be recorded on the reverse of the police station copy of the first information report, and the date and hour of receipt shall be entered on each copy of the diary. (4) The original shall be despatched with as little delay as possible to the inspector or other superior officer as may be ordered, after the time of despatch has been entered in the space provided in the form on both the original and the copy or copies. Orders for the disposal and record of case diaries in the headquarters office are contained in rule 11.70. Also see rule 27.38. (5) A copy of every case diary shall be retained at the police station, a separate file being maintained for each case. Such files shall be destroyed in accordance with the periods fixed in sub-rule 27.39 (5). (6) Copies of all orders received at a police station in connection with case diaries and the replies thereto shall be made on blank sheet of paper and shall be attached to the case diary to which they refer. 22. Sub-rule (2) envisages that the case diary has to be sent from the scene of investigation to the police station. The number of each case diary has to be recorded on the reverse of the first information report in terms of sub-rule (3). Sub-rule (4) enjoins upon the Investigating Officer that the original case diary shall be despatched to the Inspector or other superior officers as may be ordered. If the case diaries were being numbered by the Investigating Officer when he was recording it for each day, he would have done so in the copying pencil which he has used in part of the case diaries. Part of the case diaries has been written either in ink or in ball pen. Entirely a different ink has been used for paging the case diary It is clear that this has been given consecutive page numbers at one go. Part of the case diaries has been written either in ink or in ball pen. Entirely a different ink has been used for paging the case diary It is clear that this has been given consecutive page numbers at one go. Why the police has decided not to get the pages numbered at the time of getting the case diaries printed ? is best known to the police department. However, to us this method leaves a great scope for the Investigating Officer to tamper with the case diaries by replacing the pages whenever he likes. It is surprising indeed that while these days the police is being criticised publically for the lack of bonafides, the police department would not even get the case diaries serially numbered at the time of their printing in order to show their bonafides. 23. I may record at this stage that in Delhi I had noticed that the case diaries have printed page numbers. The opening sheet always had the book number as well as the page number printed and the continuing sheets bore the printed page numbers seriatim. This indeed was a guarantee that there could be no interpolation of any page. 24. The result of inspecting case diary in the present case is that we cannot at all rely on it. On the other hand, we are satisfied that the investigation was malafide. Here was a blind murder case. There was no lead. Bhagwan Singh appellant had been hauld up under suspicion. He was found bleeding at the time of his arrest by Assistant Sub-Inspector Hari Singh (P.W. 13). This Assistant Sub-Inspector tells us that he was bleeding because the public had given a beating to this appellant. The appellant states that the beating was given to him by the police. Though he was apprehended in the morning, he was not got medically examined immediately. He was taken to the doctor only in the evening at 5.30 P. M. The doctor positively states that he had found an abrasion on the base of index left finger. It was pulled skin deep. There was another abrasion on the dorsam of the left wrist. Still a third abrasion was on the left side of the chin. Blood was oozing out from this abrasion. There is no explanation as to why the medical examination of this appellant had been delayed till late in the evening. 25. It was pulled skin deep. There was another abrasion on the dorsam of the left wrist. Still a third abrasion was on the left side of the chin. Blood was oozing out from this abrasion. There is no explanation as to why the medical examination of this appellant had been delayed till late in the evening. 25. It may also be noticed that we had asked the Investigating Officer as to why the appellant was not got medically examined at once when he was arrested and was found to have injuries on his person. The Investigating Officer would have us believe that he never found out the facts which resulted in the injuries to this appellant. He even did not bother to find out whether the appellant had been medically examined. His only answer was that he was in a great hurry. He would also have us believe that he did not see any blood oozing out from the face of Bhagwan Singh. This is absolutely contrary to the medical evidence. The doctor had found a bleeding abrasion on the chin of this appellant. How could the Investigating Officer failed to notice it though he had interrogated this appellant ? 26. We had also asked the Investigating Officer whether he suspected the blood of the deceased on the bush shirt of this appellant ? His reply was that it was possible that the blood might have been of the deceased. He had no reply to the question that in those circumstances why he did not ask the doctor conducting postmortem examination of the deceased to keep a blood sample of the deceased in order to find out its grouping. On the other hand, he would have us believe that the blood-stained bush shirt of Bhagwan Singh appellant was converted into a sealed parcel by the Assistant Sub-Inspector. This was strange because Bhagwan Singh at the time of his arrest was not being suspected of murder. 27. We have no doubt in our mind that the investigation is not bonafide. The facts discussed above show that the first; information report was written later on after the arrest of Bhagwan Singh. The inland letter Ex. P-13 was foisted on Bhagwan Singh appellant and the piece of cloth Ex. 27. We have no doubt in our mind that the investigation is not bonafide. The facts discussed above show that the first; information report was written later on after the arrest of Bhagwan Singh. The inland letter Ex. P-13 was foisted on Bhagwan Singh appellant and the piece of cloth Ex. P-8, which was never near about the scene of crime, was planted there in order to complete the chain of circumstances to fasten the murder on him. It is no doubt true that Bhagwan Singhs bush shirt was found to be stained with human blood. But then Bhagwan Singh was bleeding at the time of his arrest and so it was not surprising that his bush shirt was found stained with blood. And who had given him a beating ? We are not satisfied that the beating was given by the public. 28. Admittedly there is nothing against Bir Singh appellant except the recovery of a knife. Even if the knife was recovered, as alleged by the police, it does not connect him with the murder. We are, however, not at all satisfied with the recoveries of knives also. Alleged statements of disclosure were made after about 8 days of the arrest of the appellants. Both these knives were recovered from near the same tahli trees. However, each of the appellant is stated to have taken the police individually to the same tahli tree and got the knife recovered from a nearby place. As we have already found the investigation malafide, we cannot believe the police version. 29. The result is that the appeals are allowed. The convictions of the appellants and the sentences awarded to them are hereby quashed and set aside. The appellants are directed to be released forthwith unless they are wanted in any other case. Appeals allowed.