JUDGMENT : All the three appellants have been convicted under sec. 302 read with sec. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life as also to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- each in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year. These appellants have further been convicted under section 201 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them have been sentenced to under-go rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for four months. Substantive sentences have however been ordered to run concurrently. 2. At the very outset it may be stated that appellant no. 1 Yakub Ansari is the husband of appellant no. 2 Zairun Nisa and appellant no. 3 Taskeem Ansari is their son. The deceased Azmerun Khatoon was the wife of appellant no. 3. 3. Prosecution case briefly stated is that P.W. 8 Sheoji Singh who was then posted as A. S. I. at Amba outpost within Kutumba police Station district Aurangabad, recorded the Fard Beyan (Ext. 2) on the statement of Yakub Ansari appellant no. 1 at 7.20 a.m. on 14.3.1983. This statement of Yakub Ansari was forwarded by P. W. 8 to Kutumba Police Station for registering an unnatural death case. It appears that on the basis of this statement of appellant no 1, U. D. Case No. 1/83 dated 14-3-1983 was registered at Kutumba Police Station. P. W. 8 Sheoji Singh himself took up investigation of the U. D. Case and he went to the place of occurrence on the same day at 8.50 a. m. in the morning. The place of occurrence, according to P.W. 8, was the residential house of Yakub Ansari which was mud-built and tiled roof. The main entrance of the house was toward west and the door-frames were found intact. After entering into the house he found in the courtyard an oven towards cast and one dekchi (pot) on the oven in which materials for preparing a pasty substance were found. A bamboo was also hanging on the oven and half burnt string was found hanging with the bamboo. There was on room inside the court-yard towards south. P.W.8 the Investigating Officer was taken inside in this room by the appellant. A bamboo was also hanging on the oven and half burnt string was found hanging with the bamboo. There was on room inside the court-yard towards south. P.W.8 the Investigating Officer was taken inside in this room by the appellant. There was a cot inside that room and the dead body of Azmerun Khatoon was lying thereon. The string of right hand side of the, cot was found partially burnt and the bed sheet was also partially burnt. Bundle of string was also found inside the room, which was also found half burnt Nothing of importance was found near the oven. Handlume machine was found on the western verandah. P. W. 8 held inquest on the dead body of Azmerun Khatoon in presence of the witnesses which has been marked as Ext 3. Thereafter P. W. 8 sent the dead body of Azmerun Khatoon through a constable to Aurangabad for post-mortem examination. 4. P. W. 3 Dr. S. J Rahman on the same day, i. e, on 14-3-1983 at 4 p. m. held post-mortem examination on the dead body of Azmerun Khatoon i.e. the wife of appellant no. 3. According to the doctor, the dead body was of a female aged about 18 years. It was well built and of an average height. Rigormortis was present. On examination the whole body was found burnt and charred, right from the head to foot. No external injury or ligature mark could be visible due to charging of t he body. The burnt injuries were post-mortem in nature as the doctor did not find any line of redness around the burnt parts of the body. There were false vesication, some of them was containing air and no serum was found and its base was yellow and not red. Whole burnt body was dull and white in appearance. On dissection of the body following ante-mortem injuries were seen and noted :- The cricoid and thyroid cartilage was placed normally. -There was extra vasation of blood into the - sub Cuteneous tissues in the adjacent muscle of the neck and trachea. The lyrynx and trachea was congested and contained frothy mucus. The pupil was diluted. There was bleeding from the nose. The tongue was protruded and dark in dour. I there was discharge of feaces from the anus. -There was extra vasation of blood into the - sub Cuteneous tissues in the adjacent muscle of the neck and trachea. The lyrynx and trachea was congested and contained frothy mucus. The pupil was diluted. There was bleeding from the nose. The tongue was protruded and dark in dour. I there was discharge of feaces from the anus. One foot long and 6 inches wide piece of doth was Inserted into the vagma which was taken out. The uterus was non-pregnent in size. Viscera was preserved for examination. In the opinion of tile doctor, the cause of death was due to throttling of the neck leading to asphyxia. Time elapsed, between death and examination was within 12 to 18 hours. Past-mortem has been marked as Ext. 1. 5. On receipt of the post-mortem report it was found by the Investigating Officer that it was not a case of unnatural death as repoted by appellant No.1 Yakub Ansari but it appeared to be a case of murder. He (P. W. 8) on his own statement submitted report to the Officer Incharge of Kutumba Police Station which has been marked as Ext 4. On the basis of the aforesaid report of P.W. 8 formal F.I.R. (Ext.5) was drawn up at Kutumba Police Station and the case under section 302/201 of the Indian Penal Code was registered against these appellants Imamuddin and Rafik Ansari. The allegations as contained in the report (Ext. 4) are that on the statement of appellant Yakub Ansari, U. D. Case was registered. In course of investigation and during the inquest of the dead body of the deceased P. W. 8 grew suspicious and therefore, the dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. Post-mortem examination was conducted by Shri M.J. Rahman of Sadar Hospital, Aurangabad in which the doctor opined that the deceased had died due to throttling, P.W. 8 came to the conclusion that the inmates of the house had committed them under of Azmerun Khatoon, P.W. 8 continued the investigation of this case as well and he took further steps in the investigation including the recording of the statement of the witnesses. After completing the investigation .charge sheet was submitted against these appellants and other two accused persons as named in the F.I.R. were not sent up for trial. 6. However, the prosecution allegation as disclosed by P. W. 7 (father of the deceased namely, Md. After completing the investigation .charge sheet was submitted against these appellants and other two accused persons as named in the F.I.R. were not sent up for trial. 6. However, the prosecution allegation as disclosed by P. W. 7 (father of the deceased namely, Md. Safik) in court is that after marriage his daughter the deceased, was tortured by her inlaws since she had not taken' with her sufficient dowry she used to be assaulted as well. The appellants used to make demand for watch cycle, radio etc. Some of the articles required by them were given by P.W. 7 to the appellants but they returned them back saying that they were not to their satisfaction. According to P.W.7 the appellants were demanding either Rs. 10,000/- or articles of their choice. He was unable to fulfil their demand. After marriage his daughter had come back to his house and had narrated about the ill-treatment meted to her P. W. 7 had a talk in this connection with his Samdhi, appellant no. 1 and his son in-law, appellant no. 3 and they were fire regarding their demand. Thereafter P.W. 7 called a Panchaiti in village Amba in which Nabi Zan (P.W. 1). Md Zalil (P.W. 4), Sarfuddin (P.W.2) Md. Yusuf (P.W. 9) and Md. Yasin (P. W. 5) were the panches. Appellant No. 1 Yakub Ansari and his uncle had attended the panchaiti. After panchaiti punches went to the house of Yakub Ansari as well where appellant no. 1 Yakub Ansari and appellant no. 3 Taskeem Ansari and appellant no. 2 Zairun Nisa were met by the punches and were pacified. At that time the daughter of P. W.7, i.e., namely the deceased was at her father in-law's place. After three months of this panchaiti P.W. 7 got an information that his daughter Azmerun Khatoon had been murdered by the appellants and they have set fire to her dead body. On the way he met the police officer going with the dead body who took him to Amba outpost. Thereafter he went to Aurangabad alongwith the dead body where postmortem examination was held on the dead body The dead body was buried at Aurangabad. 7. On these allegations these appellant were charge-sheeted and sent up for trial by the Investigating Officer, P.W 8. After cognizance and commitment of the case these appellants was put on trial. Thereafter he went to Aurangabad alongwith the dead body where postmortem examination was held on the dead body The dead body was buried at Aurangabad. 7. On these allegations these appellant were charge-sheeted and sent up for trial by the Investigating Officer, P.W 8. After cognizance and commitment of the case these appellants was put on trial. Charge under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against all the appellants and the se appellants were further charged under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code as well by the learned trial court. The appellants, however, pleaded not guilty to the charges. 8. In order to substantiate the charges, in all, 10 witnesses were produced by the prosecution out of whom P.W. 5 Md. Yasin, P.W.6 Aztulla Ansari and P.W.9 Yusuf Ansari were tendered and others were examined The appellants were also examined under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. However no witness on their behalf was examined. But from the statement of the appellants under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and cross. examination of the witnesses as well as the report submitted by appellant no. 1 Yakub Ansari at Kutumba Police Station which has been marked as Ext 2, the case of the defence is that according to the appellants the death of the deceased was not natural rather it was accidental case by burning when the deceased was engaged in domestic work. At the conclusion of the trial the Learned trial court came to the finding that the medical evidence established that Azmerun Khatoon the deceased had died on account of throttling. The theory of death on account of accidental death did not fit in with other materials. On consideration of the evidence the learned tri al court also found that theory of suicide and accidental death on account of burning were also not substantiated by the evidences on the record, both medical and circumstantial. The theory of death on account of accidental death did not fit in with other materials. On consideration of the evidence the learned tri al court also found that theory of suicide and accidental death on account of burning were also not substantiated by the evidences on the record, both medical and circumstantial. It also concluded that the materials on the record showed that except the present appellants non-else lived in the house in which' the deceased was murdered at about the time of occurrence and on the basis of other - materials on the record as well as the statements of appellant Yakub Ansari recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the learned trial court also came to the conclusion that the present appellants were the only persons who had the motive as also the opportunity of committing the murder of the deceased and further that their action both before and subsequent to her death, leads to only one conclusion, i.e. it were they and none else, who had, committed the murder of Azmerun Khatoon. On the basis of the aforesaid finding the learned trial court convicted and sentenced the appellants as stated above. 9. The learned counsel appearing for the appellants has not disputed the finding of the trial court that the death of the deceased was not accidental but was a case of murder, But the findings and conclusion of the trial Court that the appellants were perpetrators of the crime in question, i.e. these appellant had committed the murder of the deceased, Azmerun Khatoon, has been vehemently challenged by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants In this connection it has also been argued that there is absolute lack of reliable material on the record to establish that there was any motive on the part of those appellants to commit the murder of Azmerun Khatoon who wag the wife of appellant no. 3 and daughter-in-law of appellant no. 1 and 2. The learned trial court while coming to the conclusion that these appellants were the persons who had committed the murder of the deceased has taken into consideration some circumstances as well all the report (Ext.2)submitted by appellant no. 3 and daughter-in-law of appellant no. 1 and 2. The learned trial court while coming to the conclusion that these appellants were the persons who had committed the murder of the deceased has taken into consideration some circumstances as well all the report (Ext.2)submitted by appellant no. 1 Yakub Ansari at Aruba Out-post as also false plea set up by them in course of their examination under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Court, which is not proper and legal. 10. As already stated above, in all, 10 witnesses were examined by the prosecution out of them P.W.I Nabizan Mian who is resident of village Jankinagar, P.W. 2 Sarfuddin resident of the same village, P.W. 3 Zalil resident of Sonar Khap are witnesses on the point of panchaiti which according to the prosecution was held at village Ambaat the house of Ayub in connection with the demands of dowry made by the appellants and ill-treatment by them with the deceased. P. W. 5 Me Yasin, P.W. 6 Aztulla Ansari and P. W. 9 Md. Yusuf appear to be the punches of the panchaity but they have been tendered. P. W. 10 Md. Asif Ansari is a formal witness. He claims to have gone to the home of the appellants after hearing the information that daughter--in law of Yakub had died due to burning. He saw the dead body and went to Police Station. Some articles were seized in his presence from the place of occurrence Regarding other witnesses reference has already been made. 11. Now coming to the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellants we find that the learned trial court for coming to the conclusion that these appellants had committed the murder of Azmerun Khatoon has taken into consideration certain circumstance as well as their false plea of defence. These circumstances which have been relied upon are that there was strong motive for these appellants to commit the murder of the deceased. For this purpose the learned trial court has relied upon the testimony of P.W. 7 and P.Ws. 1,2 and 4. These circumstances which have been relied upon are that there was strong motive for these appellants to commit the murder of the deceased. For this purpose the learned trial court has relied upon the testimony of P.W. 7 and P.Ws. 1,2 and 4. The motive for the murder of the deceased as raised by the prosecution was that from the time of the marriage there was demand of dowry by Yakub Ansari, appellant no.1, from the father of the deceased and when the demand of dowry was not fulfilled by the father of the deceased the appellants started torturing the deceased and also used to beat her in that process so that they may extract the demand from the father of the deceased. In this connection evidence has been led by the prosecution through P.W. 7 that some articles were sent by the prosecution to the appellants but the appellants returned the flame except a fan saying that those articles were not of their choice and so the appellants mainly appellant no I Yakub Ansari made a demand that either the father of the deceased namely, P. W. 7 shoo uld pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- in cash or articles of their choice. Regarding the allegations of torture by the appellants meted to the deceased the learned trial court has relied on the testimony of P.W. 7 as well as P.Ws. 1, 2 ,and 4. No doubt P. W. 7 has stated in court that there was demand of dowry as stated above and when the demands were not fulfilled his daughter used to be ill-treated by the appellants and in that connection a panchaity was held in village Amba at the house of Yakub Ansari. But it is necessary to examine whether these statements of P. Ws. 1,2 and 4 who were the punches of the panchaity which was held in connection with the demand of do•' wary and ill-treatment, by the appellants with the deceased are worth acceptance or are belated and suspicious. In our view, the learned trial court was not justified in accepting the testimony of P. W. 7 and other witnesses on the aforesaid point, for the simple reason that the story of making demand of dowry and torture by the appellants on the very face of it, from the perusal of the record, appears to be belated one and an after thought. We say so because as stated above the case instituted on the basis of the report submitted by P. W.8 which is Ext.4 which P.W. 8 sent to the Officer lncharge, Kutumba Police Station after receiving the postmortem report and knowing the opinion of the doctor that the deceased had died due to throttling and it was not a case of accidental death by burning. P.W. 7 the father of the deceased has categorically stated in his evidence that he got an information that his daughter had been burnt and killed and then he proceeded and on way met Daroga Ji who was going with the dead body. He went to Amba Police Station alongwit Daroga Ji and also thereafter to Aurangabad where post-mortem examination was held on the dead body of the deceased. Still from the evidence led by the prosecution it would appear that nothing was disclosed P.W 7 to P.W. 8 or any other police officer regarding the demand of dowry. To us it appears that so far as P. W.7 is concerned he had disclosed this story of demand of dowry as well as of torture for the first time in court because from the evidence of P.W. 8 the Investigating Officer it would appear that while being examined by the Investigating Officer P.W. 7 did not state anything regarding the demand of Rs. 10,000/- or any other articles in lieu thereof and as well as regarding any torture. It does not stand to reason that if these were the true state of affairs the natural conduct of P.W.7 would have been that after getting an in-formation of murder committed by these appellants he would have at-once disclosed regarding the demand of dowry as well as the ill• treatment by the appellants with his daughter before the police. But inaction on the part of P. W. 7 in this regard clearly indicates that this story has seen the light of the day for the first time after the receipt of the post-mortem report and the institution of the case. 12. Another piece of evidence regarding the motive i.e. the demand of dowry and ill-teratment by the appellants with the deceased is the statement of the punches namely, P. Ws. 1, 2 and 4 but their evidence is not also reliable in view of the fact that P.W. 1 is the uncle of P.W. 7. 12. Another piece of evidence regarding the motive i.e. the demand of dowry and ill-teratment by the appellants with the deceased is the statement of the punches namely, P. Ws. 1, 2 and 4 but their evidence is not also reliable in view of the fact that P.W. 1 is the uncle of P.W. 7. Besides, according to P.W. 7 and other witnesses, punchaity was held at village Amba for which we do not find any reason. If really the ere was any difference between P. W. 7 the father of the deceased and the appellants in usual course the punchaity would have been held either at the place of P. W. 7 i. e in village Jankinagar at his house or at the place of the appellants i. e. Udaiganj. Even if we accept that for some reason the punchaity was held at Amba even then this part of the prosecution case appears to be suspicious, in view of the fact that according to the prosecution i.e. the evidence of P.W. 7 and other witnesses on this point punchaity was held at the house of . Md. Ayub but surprisingly enough this Ayub has not been examined as .witness in this case. As in usual course it is expected that Md. Ayub at whose house punchaity was held also would have remained present in course of the punchaity. The other un-usual aspect is that there was none except appellant nos. 1 and 3 of village Udaiganj. Generally in cases of punchaity according to common experience punches of both sides take part in the same in order to come to an amicable settlement. But j n this case according to the prosecution allegation itself there was none from the side of the appellants in the punchaity except appellants no. 1 and 3. This also appears to be unusual. Non-disclosure of these facts before the institution of the case by P. W. 7 is itself enough to discard the prosecution allegation in this regard. 13. Regarding the ill-treatment with the deceased in Ordinary course it would be expected that any person from the village of the appellants i. e. Udaiganj would have also come forward to support the prosecution allegation on this point. The neighbours of the appellants would have been the best persons to say about the treatment either good or bad with the deceased by these appellants. The neighbours of the appellants would have been the best persons to say about the treatment either good or bad with the deceased by these appellants. But none from the village Udaiganj has been examined on this point. The absence of any witness from village Udaiganj on the point of ill-treatment with the deceased by the appellants also creates great doubt regarding this part of the allegation. Regarding ill-treatment also from the evidence of P. W. 7 it would appear that although he has stand in court that he learnt from the daughter that she was being ill-treated since the demand of dowry made by the appellants was not being fulfilled by her father. But from the evidence of P.W. 8 it would appear that P.W. 7 had not stated regarding any ill-treatment before him. P.W. 7 had not stated before P. W. 8 the Investigating Officer that he had learnt from his daughter that she was being ill-treated c by the appellants. In view of this contradiction between his statement in court and before the Investigating Officer this part of the statement of P.W. 7 can not be accepted. Of course P. W. 7 has stated in his examination-in-chief that after marriage of his daughter persons of her sasural used to ill-treat his daughter on account of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. But this statement of non-fulfillment of demand of dowry. But this statement of P.W. 7 can not be accepted in view of the aforesaid circumstances Thus from the above facts and circumstance. it would appear that there is absolutely no reliable evidence to establish the motive as imputed by the prosecution i.e. the demand of dowry and its non-fulfillment by the father of the deceased resulting in torture of the deceased by these appellants. 14 In this connection it may be stated that on the date of occurrence the first man who gave information regarding the death of the deceased was Yakub appellant no. 1. He submitted the report at Amba P. S. before P. W. 8 which is Ext. 2 and in that report appellant no. 1 Yakub alleged that the deceased had died due to burning. This story of death of the deceased as a result of burning was subsequently found incorrect in view of the post-mortem report. 1. He submitted the report at Amba P. S. before P. W. 8 which is Ext. 2 and in that report appellant no. 1 Yakub alleged that the deceased had died due to burning. This story of death of the deceased as a result of burning was subsequently found incorrect in view of the post-mortem report. Besides the false plea set up by the appellants in their statement under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that the deceased had died due to accidental burning has been found false by the learned trial court on the basis of the evidence. 15. In this connection it has been submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants that so far the circumstance that appellant no. 1 had submitted the report (Ext. 2) before the police at Amba Out-post is concerned it can not be used against the .appellants since no question under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been put to any of the appellants in this connection. Undoubtedly false information with respect to the manner of death of the deceased given by appellant no. 1 at Amba Out• post before P.W. 8 is an incriminating circumstance. Under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure it is mandatory that in every inquiry or trial, for the purpose of enabling the accused personally to exp1ain any circumstances appearing in the evidence against him, the Court shall put questions and the answer given by the accused may be taken into consideration. Since no question was put to, appellant Yakub Ansari or to any other appellants regarding the false statement contained in Ext, 2 lodged by appellant no. 1 the same can not be used against any of the appellants. In view of the above legal position the learned trial court has committed an illegality in taking into consideration Ext. 2 as well in coming to the conclusion that the appellants were guilty of the offences charged with on this basis. 15. The other circumstance which has also been taken into consideration by the learned trial court is that in their statements under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure appellant no. 3 Taskeen has set up a false plea that the deceased died as a result of burning. 15. The other circumstance which has also been taken into consideration by the learned trial court is that in their statements under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure appellant no. 3 Taskeen has set up a false plea that the deceased died as a result of burning. On this point the learned counsel appearing for the appellants has relied upon the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sharad Vs. State of Maharashtra where in it has been held that the prosecution must stand or fall on its own legs and it can not derive any strength from the weakness of the defence. From the narration of the facts and evidence of this case it would appear that it is purely a case of circumstantial evidence since there is no direct evidence regarding the murder of the deceased, i.e; there is no eye witness of the occurrence. So according to the well settled law that the plea set up by the appellant Taskeem which has been found to be false by evidence led on behalf of the prosecution can not be used as a missing link in the chain of the circumstances. The golden principles in a case of circumstantial evidence have been enunciated. The following conditions must be fulfilled before a case against an accused based on circumstantial evidence can be said to be full y established. 1. the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. The circumstances concerned ‘must or should' and not 'may be' established. 2. the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable or any other hypo-thesis except that the accused is guilty 3. the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency. 4. they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved and 5. there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the can clusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the Act, must have been done by the accused. A case can be said to be proved only when there is certain and explicit evidence and no person can be convicted on pure moral conviction. 16. A case can be said to be proved only when there is certain and explicit evidence and no person can be convicted on pure moral conviction. 16. Now putting the case in hand on the test which has been set up by the guide lines in the aforesaid decision it would appear that the prosecution evidence is much below the standard. For coming to the conclusion that the guilt of the appellant had been it established, the learned trial court has come to the conclusion that these appellants were guilty under section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code since they were the inmates of the house, in my own view this circumstance alone can not be sufficient to come to a conclusion that they had committed the crime in question So far as appellant No.2 the mother-in-law of the deceased, namely, Zairun Nisa wife of appellant No. 1 is concerned there is no sufficient materials on the record that she ever played any part either in torture or in making demand of dowry or in commission of the murder. There is only vague and general statement of P.W. 7, P.W. 1, 2 and 4 [the punches] that they had also talked about the torture by appellant No.2. In case of circum-stanital evidence an accused can be convicted only when circumstantial evidence is in compatible with the innocence of the •accused. In other words which leads to only one conclusion i e. the conclusion of the guilt of the accused persons. In the present case there is no doubt that the deceased had been murdered in the house of the appellants. But there is no legal evidence which can be used as circumstance to connect any of the appellants with the commission of the crime i.e. their par6cipation in the crime in question. The possibility that either of them might have committed the murder of those persons who had also been made accused in the F. 1. R. besides these appellants might be the murderers of the deceased can not be ruled out. The possibility that either of them might have committed the murder of those persons who had also been made accused in the F. 1. R. besides these appellants might be the murderers of the deceased can not be ruled out. So the circumstances of this case are such on he basis of which one can not come to only one conclusion i.e. murder of the deceased was committed by these appellants The circumstances, which have been relied upon by the learned trial court in coming to the conclusion, that the appellants are guilry of the offence of murder of the deceased, are not enough to complete the chain of circumstantial evidence to come to an irresistible conclusion that these appellants had committed the murder of Azmerun Khatoon. 17. Regarding the conviction of the appellants under sect ion 201 of the Indian Penal Code as well we find that there is neither any direct evidence nor any circumstantial evidence to establish that any of these appellants had made an attempt to dispose of the dead body, knowing or having reason to believe that she had been murdered Or made any attempt to cause offence of commison of the murder of the deceased lady to disappear with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment Or had knowingly that murder had been commited gave false information. 18. So far as the information lodged at the P S. by appellant no.1 Yakub Ansari is concerned which has been found false in view of the medical evidence, there is nothing on the record to indicate that appellant no.1 gave false-information at the P. S. knowing that the deceased had been murdered. In these circumstances, the findings and conclusion of the learned trial court in convicting and sentencing the appellants can not be upheld. 19. This appeal is, therefore allowed and the orders of conviction and sentence passed by learned trial court are hereby set aside and all the appellant are acquitted of their respective charge. They shall be discharged from the inabilities of their bail bonds. Appeal allowed.