JUDGMENT S. Padmanaban, J. 1. The two appellants in Criminal Appeal No. 330 of 1986 were tried and convicted for offences punishable under S.302, 379 and 201 with the aid of S.34 of the Indian Penal Code. For murder, life imprisonment was awarded to both of them. No separate sentence was given for the other offences. Criminal Appeal No. 451 of 1986 was filed by the State for enhancement of the sentence. 2. Deceased Chandran Nair and PW 1 Appukuttan were close friends hailing from Thiruvananthapuram. They were engaged in selling clothes on instalment basis at Poothole in Thrissur. Their joint residence was in one of the rooms in the residential building of PW 3 at Adiyat lane, Poothole. PW 2 Ibrahim is a shop owner at Poothole. He was the common friend of Chandran Nair and PW 1. First accused Royson alias Paul was the driver of the second accused Madhavan. The second accused was having a white tourist ambassador car, KEE 5817, and a tempo van. These two appellants were also friends of Chandran Nair. Second accused had some business failure and he was in financial difficulties. 3. Accused 1 and 2 persuaded Chandran Nair to join them in a partnership for buying and selling automobiles. The total investment agreed was Rs. 60,000/-. That had to be shared by all the three equally. Chandran Nair had no funds. He knew that PW 1 will not allow him to go in for car business. He therefore, requested PW 1 for an advance of Rs. 20,000/- as if it was for being paid to PW 2. PW 1 gave Rs. 16,000/-. He was able to command only that much of money. Chandran Nair somehow or other collected Rs. 3,000/- more. The shortage of Rs. 1,000/- was received from PW 2 PW 2 was told about the real need for money. At that time, a further request was made to him that PW 1 should not be informed about the purpose of purchasing the car. So also, Chandran Nair did not inform PW 2 that in his name he borrowed Rs. 16,000/- from PW 1. 4. Chandran Nair informed PW 1 that early morning on 9-1-1984 he was going with some friends for attending a marriage. The amount of Rs. So also, Chandran Nair did not inform PW 2 that in his name he borrowed Rs. 16,000/- from PW 1. 4. Chandran Nair informed PW 1 that early morning on 9-1-1984 he was going with some friends for attending a marriage. The amount of Rs. 20,000/- was covered by him in a presentation paper packet taken from the shop of PW 2 in order to make it appear to PW 1 that it was only a presentation for the marriage. 5. Early morning on 9-1-1984, at about 4. 30, accused 1 and 2 came in KEE 5817 driven by the first accused. With the amount of Rs, 20,000/- covered in the presentation paper, Chandran Nair accompanied them in the car. At about 5. 30, they reached Vaniampara. The car was stopped in an isolated place, near the old P. W. D. Road at Kuthiran All the three got down to pass urine. When the deceased was about to enter the car, the first accused caught-hold of his neck from behind. He was strangulated and pushed inside the. back seat of the car. Second accused caught-hold of his legs and pushed him inside. When Chandran Nair resisted and struggled, he was pushed down in front of the back seat. Second accused stood on his legs and pulled his hair on the scalp with force. In furtherance of their common intention, they murdered him. Then they removed his watch and the amount of Rs 20,000/- also. With the intention of screening themselves from the legal punishment, they caused disappearance of the evidence. A black towel was taken from the ear and tied around the -neck of the deceased. The dead body was covered in a gunny bag and placed in the dickey. The car was then driven to Vazhachal through Chalakkudi - Anamala road. The body was taken out and placed beneath an Elaku tree in the Elaku plantation, 82 metres north of the road. Then both the appellants returned to Thrissur. On the way, the presentation paper was thrown away near the canal bridge at Potta. The car was then given for body wash to Thrissur Petrol Sales and Service. The gunny bag was thrown into a gutter. The black towel was given to PW 25. The wrist watch was given to CW 16, who is the mother of the second accused. KEE 5817 was subsequently exchanged for KEF 3957. The car was then given for body wash to Thrissur Petrol Sales and Service. The gunny bag was thrown into a gutter. The black towel was given to PW 25. The wrist watch was given to CW 16, who is the mother of the second accused. KEE 5817 was subsequently exchanged for KEF 3957. This is the prosecution case. 6. Defence of the appellants is a total denial of their involvement. They would say that Chandran Nair was heavily involved in debts and, therefore, he absconded from the place. 7. The evidence consists of the depositions of PWs 1 to 63, Exts. P1 to P74 and MOs 1 to 37. Exts. XI to X5 (b) are the third party documents. No defence witness was examined. Exts. D1 to D4 are the defence documents. 8. PW 14, a forest guard of Vazhachal Range, saw the dead body on 1-2-1984. He gave Ext. P9 report to the Range Officer, PW 15. PW 15 gave Ext. P10 report to the police station. That is how the -case was registered Investigation was by PW 63. Charge was laid by PW 62. 9. The case depends purely on circumstantial evidence The question for consideration in Criminal Appeal No. 330 of 1986 is whether the circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction. If the evidence is found sufficient and the conviction is to be maintained, the question for consideration in the State appeal is whether this is one of the rarest of rare cases deserving the extreme penalty. 10. The nature and extent of proof for conviction in a case depending solely on circumstantial .evidence is now well settled. The evidence must satisfy three tests, viz. i) the circumstances, from which the inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established; ii) those circumstance should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards the . guilt of the accused; and iii) the circumstances, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability, the crime was committed by the accused and none else. The circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be completed . and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused. The circumstantial evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt, but should be inconsistent with innocence also. The circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be completed . and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused. The circumstantial evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt, but should be inconsistent with innocence also. It is not necessary that there should be any particular numbers of circumstances. What is required is the conclusive ness of the circumstances, which alone will make the chain complete with all the required links. Even if a particular link is suspicious, it is of no consequence if it is satisfactorily explained and the suspicion removed by other* items of evidence Law does not require the prosecution to achieve meticulous perfection which is next to impossibility. 11. We are not going to analyse the entire evidence before us Our endeavour will be. to confine consideration to absolute necessary and relevant facts. Learned counsel for the appellants pointed out that the prosecution failed in establishing (a) that appellants 1 and 2 were seen with the deceased, (b) that they entered into a partnership with him, and (c) that the deceased had the amount with him and he joined them. Therefore, it was pointed out that the conviction is without any legal evidence and hence, it cannot stand. 12. The first question to be considered is whether Chandran Nair D is alive or dead. If he is dead, the further question is whether he had a homicidal death, as alleged. Dead body was seen first only after about three weeks from the alleged date of death. That was on 1-2-1984 Ext. P9 is the report by PW 14, who saw the dead body. That was given to his superior officer, PW 15. It was PW 15 who set the law in motion . by giving Ext. P10 report to the police. Case was registered by PW 55. He held inquest over the dead body. The report is Ext. P13. MO 2 pant was lying close to the dead body. It contained the name 'Chandran'. MO1 is the shirt found on the dead body itself. The left pocket of the shirt contained inscription of the letters 'RS'. The evidence is that it is the short form of 'Redson International Tailors', from where it was stitched. MO 3 series are the shoes found near the dead body. It contained the name 'Chandran'. MO1 is the shirt found on the dead body itself. The left pocket of the shirt contained inscription of the letters 'RS'. The evidence is that it is the short form of 'Redson International Tailors', from where it was stitched. MO 3 series are the shoes found near the dead body. MO 6 series are the socks, .one of which was on the leg and the other was near the dead body. So also, MO 4 sheddy was there. In the pant pocket, . there was MO 5 kerchief. A tuft of hair was also found near the dead body. 13. Autopsy was held by PW 33. Ext. P30 is the post mortem certificate. The body underwent extreme putrefaction. All the soft tissues were removed from the body. Therefore, it was not possible to note any ante mortem injuries. Cause of death was, therefore, incapable of being found out. Ext. P32 is the report of chemical analysis of the viscera contents. Ext. P 31 is the final opinion. No poison was detected evidencing suicide. The exact time of death was also impossible of ascertainment. The opinion given is that death must have been two weeks or more prior to post mortem examination. PW 33 said that once decomposition advanced, no sign of injury or strangulation could be seen on the body. Anyhow, from the place where the dead body was found this could only be a case of murder and the body being carried and placed there after murder. The deceased had absolutely no reason to go over there. Heart attack suspected in the inquest could only be a guess work. Going by the ' facts on record, death by heart attack in that location is next to impossibility. So also, we are having the evidence of PW 59 and Ext. P61 report submitted by him, giving the opinion that the hair found inside the car (seat and dickey) KEE 5817 and that collected from near the dead body would have come from the same scalp. 14. PW 37 is the tailor who is running Redson International Tailors at Thrissur. The evidence of PWs 1 and 37 show that PW 1 and the deceased were having their garments prepared by PW 37. 14. PW 37 is the tailor who is running Redson International Tailors at Thrissur. The evidence of PWs 1 and 37 show that PW 1 and the deceased were having their garments prepared by PW 37. PW 37 gave evidence that MO 1 shirt and MO 2 pant were made by him and given to the deceased six months prior to the incident. He said that the incription 'RS' refers to his shop. His evidence is that the name 'Ghandran' in the pocket of MO 2 was written by him. He also said that MO 5 kerchief was made by him for the deceased. The evidence of PW 1 is that himself and the deceased jointly purchased some cut pieces with which some kerchieves were made' including MO 5. MO3 series shoes were also identified by PW 1 as those worn by the deceased, He had an additional reason to identify these shoes not only as the room mate and close friend of the deceased, but also as a person who was present when these shoes were purchased from Madras. PW 1 identified MOs 1 to 6 as the specific items of dress worn by the deceased at the time when he left the room early morning on 9-1-1984 never to return. MO 19 watch was also identified by PW 1 as the one which belonged to the deceased and worn by him when he was last, seen alive. In the strap of that watch, the name of the deceased is seen engraved. 15. When PW 63 arrested and questioned the second accused, he gave information that MO 19 watch was entrusted by him to his mother at his residence. He offered to point out the house and the mother. Accordingly he led the police party to his house and called his mother. When the mother came out, he requested her to bring the watch given by him. The mother CW 15 brought the watch. It is MO 19. It was seized under Ext. P4 mahazar. It is seen that the strap of MO 19 contained the inscription of the name of the deceased. These fact are proved by the evidence of PWs 11, 50 and 63. The information and the discovery definitely come within the purview of S.27 of the Evidence Act. It is MO 19. It was seized under Ext. P4 mahazar. It is seen that the strap of MO 19 contained the inscription of the name of the deceased. These fact are proved by the evidence of PWs 11, 50 and 63. The information and the discovery definitely come within the purview of S.27 of the Evidence Act. Instead of being concealed in a place, the concealment in this case is by entrustment with a person. The authorship of the concealment by entrustment and knowledge about it were exclusive to that of the second accused. The discovery of the watch is the direct consequence of the information given by the second accused. The correctness of that information is guaranteed by the discovery. The identification of that watch to be that of the deceased and worn by him when he was last seen alive in the company of the accused is a clinching circumstance. When the second accused was not able to offer any explanation at all for the possession of the watch, the incriminative aspect has reached its zenith. That is evidently a circumstance which leads to the conclusion of homicidal death of Chandran Nair. 16. The evidence of PWs. 1, 2 and 3 clearly indicate that Chandran Nair went out under the pretext of going for a marriage though actually he went along with the appellants for purchasing car. The other item of evidence we are going to discuss in the succeeding paragraphs will indicate that he went in KEE 5817 in the company of the appellants Though the appellants returned , Chandran Nair never returned and they were not able to give any information also The appellants were not able to explain how Chandran Nair is missing. The fact that Chandran Nair was a close friend of the appellants is clear from the depositions of PWs 38 and 41 as well as other items of evidence If he is actually alive, he would have definitely returned, or contacted his parents or PWs 1 and 2. These are indications that he is not alive and the dead body found out was that of Chandran Nair. We are of opinion that he had a homicidal death, This conclusion of ours is further strengthened by the materials, which we are going to discuss further. 17. PW 44 is a photographer. MO 21 is a photograph of the deceased taken by him. We are of opinion that he had a homicidal death, This conclusion of ours is further strengthened by the materials, which we are going to discuss further. 17. PW 44 is a photographer. MO 21 is a photograph of the deceased taken by him. MO 30 is its negative. Ext. X2 is the ledger maintained by PW 44. It contains the relevant entry. His bill book is MO 35. The photo was taken on 22-4-1983. It was given to the deceased on 26-4-1983. Photo was taken wearing MO 32 Coat supplied from the studio of PW 44. Ext. P44 is the mahazar by which these records were seized by PW 63 from his studio. MO 8 was identified by this witness as a copy of MO 21 photo of the deceased. 18. The skull and mandible of the dead body as well as the photograph of Chandran Nair were given to Dr. Umadathan, who was the Professor of Forensic Medicine, and Police Surgeon at the Medical College, Alappuzha. He was not available for examination as he was employed in Libya. His opinion, Ext. P41, and the disposition pictures belonging to the skull and the person contained in Ext. P42 prepared by him on the basis of the photograph were proved through , PW 61. PW 61 is Dr. Kanthaswamy, Principal of Medical College Thrissur. Dr. Umadathan was his student. Both are experts in forensic medicine and well versed in the technique of identifying persons from skull bone by the technic of super imposition. By that process, in Ext. P41, Dr. Umadathan gave the opinion that the skull and mandible supplied to him could have belonged to the person in the photograph supplied to him. 19. PW 61 gave evidence that the anatomical points and anthropological landmarks studied for comparison of the two pictures by Dr. Umadathan and employed by him are the standard methods and techniques followed in super imposition and the opinion in Ext. P 41 is reasonable and based on right criteria. It is true that, as admitted by him, this is not a conclusive proof for establishing identity. But it gives highly probable evidence. It is true that the possibility of two "persons having the same anthropological landmarks and anatomical points cannot be completely ruled out. That is why it cannot be accepted as a sole and fool-proof method of identification. It is true that, as admitted by him, this is not a conclusive proof for establishing identity. But it gives highly probable evidence. It is true that the possibility of two "persons having the same anthropological landmarks and anatomical points cannot be completely ruled out. That is why it cannot be accepted as a sole and fool-proof method of identification. There cannot be any dispute that it can be accepted atleast as a safe test for exclusion If errors do not creep in, the technique of super imposition can be fully correct in its conclusion in cases where the possibility of two persons having the same anatomical points and anthropological landmarks is excluded. Anyhow, is acceptability atleast as a corroborative or supporting piece of evidence to tilt the balance cannot be doubted. We are of opinion on the basis of the points already considered, and yet to be considered, that the prosecution succeeded in establishing the identity of the deceased as Chandran Nair and that he had a homicidal death. 20. It is true that the evidence of PWs 1, 2 and 3 do not conclusively establish that Chandran Nair went in the company of the appellants. None ] of them saw the car or the accused at the time when Chandran Nair left early morning on 9-1-1984. But it is established by the evidence that Chandran Nair was a close friend of appellants 1 and 2. The evidence of PWs 1 and 3 clearly establish the fact that Chandran Nair left the room at 4.30 a.m on 9-1-1984 wearing MOs 1 to 6 and holding something covered in a presentation paper packets. He went out as if he was going to attend a marriage in the company of some friends with the promise that he will return that evening itself. The evidence of PW 1 is that a few days before that he requested for a loan of Rs. 20,000/- from him as if it was for the necessities of PW 2. PW 1 said that he paid Rs. 16.000/-. He said that only a negligible portion out of it was withdrawn from his bank accounts. The balance was collected by him from others out of friendship towards the deceased. There is nothing uncommon in what he did to oblige a close friend. PW 1 said that he paid Rs. 16.000/-. He said that only a negligible portion out of it was withdrawn from his bank accounts. The balance was collected by him from others out of friendship towards the deceased. There is nothing uncommon in what he did to oblige a close friend. The main attack was that the prosecution did not succeed in establishing as to how PW 1 collected the amount. It is said that his pass book and bank accounts were not produced and, therefore, his evidence cannot be accepted. But, in the box, PW 1 said that his bank account was shown to the investigating officer, but he did not seize it. PW 63 admitted having seen the pass book of PW 1. He said that he did not seize the same and produce it in court only because the amount withdrawn was negligible. We do not find any reason to disbelieve PW 1 and 63 in this respect. 21. The evidence of PWs 1 and 2 show that the real purpose viz. car business was made known only to PW 2 and it was kept a secret from PW 1. The reason is that PW 1 will stand in the way if the real purpose is made known to him. That is why he told PW 1 that the amount is for PW 2. PW 2 was not informed by the deceased that on his behalf amounts were borrowed from PW 1. PW 2 was asked by the deceased to keep the car business a secret from PW 1. The presentation paper packet was taken from the shop of PW 2. Rs. 1,000/- was also borrowed from him. That is his evidence. PW 2 further said that the entire amount was counted in his presence and packed in the paper packet. , It was this paper packet that was carried by the deceased on 9-1-1984 wrongly informing PWs 1 and 3 that it is a presentation to be given for the marriage. The fact that Chandran Nair carried this paper packet at the time when he left his room on 9-1-1984 early morning is clear beyond doubt from the evidence of PWs 1 and 3. We have absolutely no reason to disbelieve these two impartial witnesses. The fact that Chandran Nair carried this paper packet at the time when he left his room on 9-1-1984 early morning is clear beyond doubt from the evidence of PWs 1 and 3. We have absolutely no reason to disbelieve these two impartial witnesses. It could, therefore, be safely found that deceased Chandran Nair left the room wearing MOs 1 to 6 and carrying the paper packet containing Rs. 20,000/-. 22. PW 5 is a neighbour of accused 1 and 2. He knew both of them very closely. At about 4.00 a.m on 9-1-1984, he saw accused 1 and 2 starting KEE 5817 and going out. They told him that they are going to purchase a car. Thereafter, he saw the car coming back by about 7.30 a.m. Then again they went out. He saw the car again only after two days. 23. PW 6 is a tea shop owner near Vellanikara Rubber Estate. He also knew accused 1 and 2 very well. His evidence shows that, at about 5.00 a.m on 9-1-1984, these two appellants along with the deceased came in the car and had tea from his shop. Chandran Nair was not known to him. But he identified Chandran Nair by his dress as well as the photograph and said that it was he who paid the cash. The presence of PW 7 at that time was also spoken to by PW 6. 24. PW 7 is a headload worker belonging to INTUC. He fully supported the evidence of PW 6. The car was also identified by these two witnesses. They are impartial witnesses against whom there is not even a suggestion of any motive for false implication. When the evidence of PWs 1 and 3 is read along with the evidence of PWs 6 and 7, it is clear that the deceased left the room early morning on 9-1-1984 in the company of these two appellants in the ambassador car KEE 5817. So also, it is evident that the deceased was at that time having Rs 20,000/- in hand. 25. The evidence of PW 5 was corroborated by PWs 9 and 10. Their evidence show that on 9-l-1984 accused 1 and 2 went out in the car at 4.30 a.m. They came back to Thrissur at 7.30 a.m. They again left the place carrying PW 10 and another person also in the car. 25. The evidence of PW 5 was corroborated by PWs 9 and 10. Their evidence show that on 9-l-1984 accused 1 and 2 went out in the car at 4.30 a.m. They came back to Thrissur at 7.30 a.m. They again left the place carrying PW 10 and another person also in the car. Both of them got down in Thrissur town and the car proceeded. The prosecution case is that this trip was after murder and that at that time the dead body of Chandran Nair was in the dickey of the car. 26. PW 16 is the receptionist in the Golden Bar at Kodakara. By about noon on 9-1-1984, both the appellants went to the bar and had food This witness had some reason to particularly remember these two persons. Against the usual practice of the bill being paid through waiters, these two persons carried the cash to the counter itself. They were making a hurry to get the balance. So also, they were carrying a liquor bottle in the hand. For these reasons, this witness particularly remembered the presence of these two appellants. 27. PW 17 is the salesman in the Kalyan Agencies and Petroleum Pump at Ollur. He said that both the appellants came in KEE 5817 on 9-1-1984 and purchased 30 litres of petrol. Ext. P11 is the bill. It was just before noon These two appellants were known to him earlier also. The evidence of this witness is also the least suspicious. 28. On 9-1-1984, at about 4 00 or 4. 30 p. m, while PW 18 was going in his motor cycle along with his friend Janardhanan to Peringalkuthu through Vazhachal, his vehicle had a brake down. When they were waiting they saw appellants 1 and 2 coming in KEE 5817. PW 18 signalled for the car to stop in order to ascertain the availability of tools to repair his vehicle. The first appellant, who was driving the car, slowed and answered in the negative to the query whether tools could be spared. This witness said that the normal practice in the high-ranges is that such request will not be turned down by anybody. For this reason also, the witness particularly remembered the car and the appellants. PW 19 also saw appellants 1 and 2 coming to his tea shop at Potta Junction in the afternoon of 9-1-1984. This witness said that the normal practice in the high-ranges is that such request will not be turned down by anybody. For this reason also, the witness particularly remembered the car and the appellants. PW 19 also saw appellants 1 and 2 coming to his tea shop at Potta Junction in the afternoon of 9-1-1984. They purchased pappadavada from his shop. He also said that both of them came in KEE 5817. According to him, they went further towards east. There is absolutely no reason to disbelieve any of these witnesses even though there are some mistakes and contradictions on some minor points. They are impartial witnessses who have no interest in the prosecution or enmity towards the appellants. The appellants were not known to some of them, but they had occasion to observe and identify them properly. The mere fact that their photographs appeared in news papers by itself is no reason to disbelieve the identification made by them during the test identification parade conducted by PW 39. Exts, P36 and 36(a) are the report and the memorandum prepared by him. The appellants had absolutely no valid explanation to offer why they went through those places. The route where the appellants were seen leads to the place from were the dead body was subsequently recovered. The only possible conclusion in such circumstances is that the appellants were going about in search of a place were the dead body could be disposed of without being noticed by anybody. 29. Recovery of MO 19 watch on the information given by the. second accused is a clinching piece of circumstantial evidence against the appellants. PWs 11,50 and 63 gave evidence in this respect. MO 19 watch was identified by many witnesses, particularly PW 1, as the one belonged to the deceased and worn by him when he was last seen alive. One redeeming feature in identifying this watch is that its strap contains the name of the deceased. The second appellant had absolutely no explanation to offer as to how he came in possession of this watch if it is otherwise than by theft after the murder of Chandran Nair. This particular circumstance alone would have been sufficient to come to the conclusion that the appellants are the murderers of Chandran Nair. 30. PW 29 was examined to prove that on 9-1-1984 the first appellant paid Rs. This particular circumstance alone would have been sufficient to come to the conclusion that the appellants are the murderers of Chandran Nair. 30. PW 29 was examined to prove that on 9-1-1984 the first appellant paid Rs. 5,000/- to her towards the amounts already due. But this witness turned hostile and said that the payment was made in December 1983 and it was deposited by her in December itself in the Federal Bank. There is no documentary evidence in support of what she said. At the same time, she admitted having given the amount to the police. She is a relation of the first appellant. PW 45 is a car broker. It was from him that the second appellant purchased the two cars. When KEE 5817 was purchased by the second appellant from him, certain amount was due as balance after the payments already made. That was the hire purchase amount due to the bank. Hi said that on 10-1-1984 he saw both the appellants going together to the Thuruthi branch of the Federal Bank for the purpose of making payment of the instalment. PW 60 is the Branch Manager of the bank. The loan ledger of the bank was taken to custody by the police under Ext. P64. But it was returned because the bank was in daily use of it. The general cash book is Ext.X4. In that there is an entry of repayment of Rs. 2, 000/- towards the above loan on 10-1-1984. But this the witness was not in a position to say who remitted the amount. That deficiency was made up by the examination of PW 36, who was a Clerk in that bank. He said that the remittance on that day was made by accused 1 and 2, who went over there. He also identified the handwriting and signature in MO 29 as that of the first appellant. The evidence of PW 45 further shows that on 21-1-1984, the second appellant surrendered KEE 5817 in exchange for a diesel ambassador ear KEF 3967 for an amount of Rs. 1,20,000/-. But no cash was paid. 31. PW 51 is the father of the second appellant. His evidence shows that the second appellant sustained loss in rice business and, therefore, he had to sell his tempo van. He is a hostile witness Anyhow, his evidence that his son was in financial difficulties could be accepted. 1,20,000/-. But no cash was paid. 31. PW 51 is the father of the second appellant. His evidence shows that the second appellant sustained loss in rice business and, therefore, he had to sell his tempo van. He is a hostile witness Anyhow, his evidence that his son was in financial difficulties could be accepted. It has to be remembered that all these money transactions were at a time when the second appellant was in financial strain. Therefore, these money transactions will have to be appreciated in that background. 32. PW 12 is a money, lender. We are not at the question whether he was running the business with a licence or not. If he was not having a licence, it is for the appropriate authorities to take action against him. His evidence shows that in December 1981, appellants 1 and 2 pledged a gold ornament with him and took a loan of Rs.5,000/-. Ext. X1 is his register, He said that the amount was paid back on 9-1-1984 and the account closed. The ornament was taken back. This payment was proved through his Clerk, examined as PW 13. He said that the payment was made by the appellants and that the application is Ext. P5. he also said that Ext. X1 was sent by the appellants. 33. PW 27 is a neighbour of the appellants, to whom amounts were Hue from the second appellant. On 10-1-84, the second appellant paid him Rs. 1,200/-. This amount was recovered from him by the police under Ext. P20. The currency notes are MO 26 series. The appellants were not able to explain how they came by these funds if it is not from the 20,000 rupees stolen from the deceased. 34. We have earlier referred to a presentation paper in which the deceased carried Rs. 20,000/-. That paper is MO 20. The gunny bag in which the dead body is alleged to have been covered and kept in the dickey is MO 23. The black towel said to have been tied around the neck of the dead body is MO 24. The evidence of PWs 21 and 63 show that on the basis of the information given by the accused, MO 20 presentation paper was recovered under Ext. P14 mahazar. That was identified by PWs 1 to 3 as the one in which money was carried by the deceased. 35. The evidence of PWs 21 and 63 show that on the basis of the information given by the accused, MO 20 presentation paper was recovered under Ext. P14 mahazar. That was identified by PWs 1 to 3 as the one in which money was carried by the deceased. 35. PW 24 is the Manager of the Service Station in which the appellants had a body wash of KEE 5817. On the basis of the information given by the first appellant, MO 23 gunny bag was seized by PW 63 under Ext. P17 mahazar from a gutter pointed out by him. This witness and PW 25 proved the further fact that at the time of body wash of KEE 5817, MO 24 towel was given by the accused to PW 25. That was recovered froth him under Ext. P18 mahazar. PW 25 is an employee in the Service Station. These are also incriminating items of circumstantial evidence against the appellants. 36. PW 59 is the Assistant Director of Biology Division, Forensic Science Laboratory, Thiruvananthapuram. He is qualified in Forensic Technology and is an expert. KEE 5817 was examined by him. Hairs and fibres were collected by him from inside the dickey and under the seats as directed by the police. They were handed over to them. His report is Ext. P61. Thereafter he received the parcel for examination from the investigating agency. It contained four packets. Item No. 1 contained four long hairs, 13 short hairs and a few textile fibres. Item No. 2 contained five long hairs. There were several short hairs in Item No. 3. Item No. 4 is a tuft of hair found by the side of the dead body. They were Washed and cleaned and examined in detail through a microscope. 25 hairs were collected at random and examined in detail. Five long hairs in Item No.1 and five long hairs in Item No.2 were different in colour and texture from the short ones in Item No. 4. Hence they were eliminated. 13 short hairs in Item No. I collected from the carpet inside the car in front of the backseat and 7 hairs in Item No.3 collected from inside the dickey were subjected to further detailed examination and comparison with those in Item No.4 collected from near the dead body. In the 13 hairs in Item No.1, roots were present and tips were cut. In the 13 hairs in Item No.1, roots were present and tips were cut. The medullae were totally absent. The scale pattern was of the typical irregular annular type. Average scale count was found to be 150 per mm. Seven short hairs in Item No 3 were found exactly similar to those in Item Nos. land 4. His opinion is that the 13 hairs collected from the carpet in front of the back seat of the car ie. Item No. 1 and 7 hairs collected from inside the dickey, which is Item No. 3, are quite similar to the hairs collected from near the dead body (Item No. 4) His report is Ext. P40. Be said that the 13 hairs in Item No.1 and 7 hairs in Item No. 3 were similar in all parameters chosen for comparison to the hairs in Item No. 4 and hence they could have come from the same source viz. the same scalp, which means the same head, definitely a human head. He also said that the presence of roots in the hair means that it must have been forcibly pulled out. But the nature of foots will be different in fallen hairs and it could be distinguished. He is definite that the hairs found inside the ear were forcibly pulled out. That is the prosecution case also. 37. It was argued for the appellants, based on the decision in Ravi Achan's case (Criminal Appeal Nos. 43 and 51 of 1985) and the Textbook on. Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology that hair analysis has not yet developed as a perfect science. It is true that on many aspects the science is having certain imperfections, but atleast in certain aspects, the science could be considered to have attained atleast nearness to perfection. For example, in the text book of Criminal Investigation by John Adam and Collyer Adam, fifth edition by Richard Leofric Jackson, at page 110, it is said that the detailed structure of the medulla and its diameter, compared with that of the hair shaft as a whole, together with the distribution and character of the pigment, the scale pattern of the cuticle and the appearance of the hair in transverse section, all provide features which, in the aggregate, enable the expert to identify any given hair with certainty. From the microscopic examination itself, it may be possible to say whether the hairs are of the same or of different colours or size and from the examination it may help in deciding where the hairs come from. 38. Ravi Acharis case (Criminal Appeal Nos. 43 and 51 of 1985) was only considering the question whether hair analysis could be the sole basis for conviction. The answer was in the negative. We are not concerned with such a situation. Here, we are having overwhelming circumstantial evidence. Hair analysis is only one of the items. Maghar Singh v. State of Punjab (1975 (4) SC C. 234), the opinion of hair analyses was accepted by the Supreme Court as the basis for conviction. The same view was taken by the Supreme Court in Kanhl Karsan Jadav v. State of Gujarat (AIR 1956 SC 821). The opinion given by PW 59 appears to us to be acceptable. In view of his opinion, it is clear that the hairs found in the car were similar to those found near the dead body with the only difference that the former hairs were pulled out, but the latter were not. That also fits in with the prosecution case. This is also, therefore, a strong link in the chain of circumstantial evidence connecting the appellants with the homicidal death of Chandran Nair. So also, that evidence connected the appellants with the offence punishable under S.201 of the Indian Penal Code. 39. To all questions asked while examined under S.313 of the Code, the only answer available to the appellants was that it is not correct. Finally the first appellant said that Chandran Nair was heavily involved in debts and hence he left the station, That is an easy way of explaining things That answer was okayed by the second appellant. They were not prepared to admit the fact that deceased Chandran Nair was in their company. That is only on account of their inability to explain how he was missing. The stand taken by them is evidently false. A false explanation given by an accused, who is in a position to give correct answer, is also a link in the chain of circumstantial evidence against him. That is only on account of their inability to explain how he was missing. The stand taken by them is evidently false. A false explanation given by an accused, who is in a position to give correct answer, is also a link in the chain of circumstantial evidence against him. The inevitable conclusion by way of inference from the various items of circumstantial evidence forming a conclusive chain is that Chandran Nair, who was in the company of the appellants, was murdered by them and the dead body was taken to the place from where it was found. So also, the other inferences are that Rs. 20,000/- and the watch, which belonged to the deceased, were stolen by the appellants after committing murder. The circumstances clearly indicate that all these acts were done by the appellants in furtherance of their common intention. 40. Learned counsel took us to the decision in State of Punjab v. Bhajan Singh and others ( AIR 1975 SC 258 ). In that decision, in an identical situation, the Supreme Court said that the doctor, who performed the post mortem examination, was careless in as much as he failed to send the dead bodies to the Professor of Anatomy, who might have been in a position to express opinion after examining the hyoid bone and cervical vertebra as to whether the death of the two deceased i persons was due to strangulation. In this case, what was revealed by the post mortem examination was that, on account of the long delay that happened, no sign of violence could be noted as the soft tissues and cartillage matters were all decomposed. We have also stated that, in the circumstances, suicide is next to impossibility. Chandran Nair had absolutely no occasion to go and lie down beneath a tree. When all the items of evidence are put together, the only inference that is possible is that Chandran Nair was done to death by the appellants and subsequently the body was taken and placed there. The absence of evidence regarding the cause of death should not, therefore, stand in the way of fixing criminality as against the appellants. We fully agree with the Sessions Judge that the prosecution succeeded in establishing beyond doubt that the appellants are guilty of all the charges, for which they were tried. The convictions are, therefore, only to stand. 41. The absence of evidence regarding the cause of death should not, therefore, stand in the way of fixing criminality as against the appellants. We fully agree with the Sessions Judge that the prosecution succeeded in establishing beyond doubt that the appellants are guilty of all the charges, for which they were tried. The convictions are, therefore, only to stand. 41. The next question to be considered is the one regarding sentence. The State has filed Criminal Appeal No. 451 of 1986. It was argued, on behalf of the State, by the Public Prosecutor that this is one of the rarest of rare casts in which the interest of society demands that the appellants should not be allowed to live. Even though we do agree with the sentiments expressed by the Public Prosecutor, we do not think that this could be considered as one of the rarest of rare cases where the extreme penalty alone is the solution. We fully agree with the Public Prosecutor that this is a case in which murder was committed not on account of any ill will towards the deceased. The deceased was the close friend of the appellants. He was murdered solely for the purpose of getting Rs. 20,000/- and the watch. That means the appellants are persons who are prepared to murder people provided they are able to make gain for themselves. They are really persons dangerous to society. But still, when the other circumstances are also taken into account, we do not think that extreme penalty is the only solution. Therefore, we are not interfering with the sentencing discretion also. Confirming the convictions and sentences, both the criminal appeals are dismissed.