Judgment L.P.N.SHAHDEO & S.N.JHA, J. 1. All the six appellants have been convicted under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo R.I. for life. They have also been found guilty and convicted under Section 148 of the Indian Penal Code but no separate sentence has been passed. However, they have not been found guilty of the charge under Section 27 of the Arms Act and also under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code and have been acquitted of that charge bv the judgment dated 7th April, 1989 passed by Sri S. N. Gupta Ist Additional Judicial Commissioner. Ranchi in Sessions Trial No. 555/87. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, as told by the informant was that on 15-3-87 at about 7 P.M. which was Aaja night Bhola Oraon. son of Cumi Devi and the informant. Ghasni Devi were sitting in her angan and they were awaiting the arrival of Bihari Oraon for burning the Agja Bihari Oraon came at that place after half an hour i.e. at about 7.30 P.M. and told them to wait till his arrival. He went towards the village and at about 9 P.M. the bhabhi of Bihari Oraon and Cumi Orain came to her house and inquired about the whereabout of Bihari Oraon. When they were talking about Bihari Oraon, at about 9.30 P.M. Kodey Oraon of the village along with Sukra Oraon alias Pagla Oraon, Ashok Verma Bhola Ram, Mantu and constable, Ramjee Paswan came there. All were armed with pistol, sword and farsa. It is alleged that Kodey Oraon, first of all, took away Bhola, Sukra and Bihari Oraon and, thereafter, Kodey returned and took away her husband Bokhre along with accused, Ramjee Paswan, Ashok Verma and Mantu and also Bhola Oraon, son of Gumi Orain telling that the constable was calling him. All were armed with weapons. She inquired from her daughter as to where they were taking her husband. Then, it is alleged that Kodey abused her and tied the hands of her husband and of Bhola with the rope and took them towards their house. She also followed them along with Gumi. They all took them towards the injunction side of the pucci road and there Kodey made all the three persons, Bihari Oraon, Bhola Oraon and Bhokhre Oraon stand on the pucci road. She also followed them along with Gumi. They all took them towards the injunction side of the pucci road and there Kodey made all the three persons, Bihari Oraon, Bhola Oraon and Bhokhre Oraon stand on the pucci road. She found that all the accused persons were armed with sword and they surrounded them. It is alleged that Kodey shot his pistol on Bihari Oraon as a result of which Bihari fell down on the ground and became restless. It is claimed that, thereafter, the other accused persons who were armed with sword started brandishing sword as a result of which her husband and Bhola Oraon sustained injury. They fell down on the ground and they also became restless. On seeing this, the informant along with her daughter, and Gumi and Belli, ran towards the village raising alarm and informed all those who were present at the time of Agfa. She took her family members to the place where the three persons had fallen. When the accused persons saw the crowd coming towards them, they fled away towards their house When she along with her family members, reached at the place she found that her husband, Bhokhre, had sustained injury on her leg and his neck was almost cut and he was lying dead in a pool of blood. She also found that the neck of Bhola Oraon was also cut and he was also lying in a pool of blood. Bihari was also lying in a pool of blood and his dead body was in the last, and others were stacked above (sic) blood. She noticed that copious of blood had fallen at the place of occurrence and all the three persons had died. She requested the villagers to keep watch over the dead bodies and she came to the police station with Beli and lodged the first information report. She has claimed that the accused persons, forming an unlawful assembly, had abducted the three persons and had killed them by sword and fire-arms. 3. The police, on the aforesaid statement of the widow of the deceased. Bhokhre Oraon, instituted a case under Sections 302/149, 147, 148 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act. 3. The police, on the aforesaid statement of the widow of the deceased. Bhokhre Oraon, instituted a case under Sections 302/149, 147, 148 and 342 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 27 of the Arms Act. inspected the place of occurrence, prepared inquest over the dead bodies of the three deceased, forwarded the same for post-mortem examination, seized the blood stained earth and also blood stained rope lying at the place of occurrence, forwarded the blood stained earth for chemical examination, examined the witnesses and submitted charge-sheet against all the six appellants at the close of the investigation. 4. All the appellants were charge under Sections 147, 148 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Accused, Kodey Oraon was further charged under Section 27 of the Arms Act. In order to prove the charges the prosecution had examined altogether 11 witnesses. 5. The defence of the appellants was that no occurrence in the manner, as alleged by the prosecution, had taken place and they have been falsely implicated in this case. The accused have not examined any D.W. 6. The trial Court, on consideration of the evidence, facts and circumstances, had hold the appellants guilty, convicted and sentenced them to the extent, indicated above. Feeling aggrieved, the accused-appellants have preferred this appeal. 7. Mr. P. S. Dayal, Sr. Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants, submitted that in this case the prosecution has introduced a radical change of the whole prosecution than that it was told in the first information report, Ext. 3. It was also submitted that medical evidence is not in conformity with the prosecution case and the prosecution has suppressed the true version of the occurrence from what it was told in the first information report and has introduced a convenient evidence to suit its purpose from stage to stage. It was, therefore, submitted that the witnesses examined are not truthful and, as such all the appellants should be acquitted. 8. On the other hand. Mr. Sumir Kumar Sinha, learned A. P. P. appearing on behalf of the State, submitted that the conviction of the appellants is based on correct appreciation of evidence and does not call for any interference. 9. Out of the 11 witnesses examined in this case P.Ws. 1 and 4 have been declared hostile by the prosecution. P.Ws. 2. Mr. Sumir Kumar Sinha, learned A. P. P. appearing on behalf of the State, submitted that the conviction of the appellants is based on correct appreciation of evidence and does not call for any interference. 9. Out of the 11 witnesses examined in this case P.Ws. 1 and 4 have been declared hostile by the prosecution. P.Ws. 2. 3 and 4 are the witnesses on inquest and seizure P.W. 5 is a formal witness who has proved the formal first information report, Ext. 3. P.W. 11 is the Investigating Officer and P.W. 10 is the doctor who had held nost-mortem examination in all the three dead bodies on 16-3-1987. PWs. 6, 7, 8 and 9 have claimed to be the witnesses of the occurrence. P.W. 6 is the informant and widow of the deceased, Bhokhre Oraon who has lodged the first information report. Ext. 3. Other remaining eye witnesses are also closely connected and related. P.W. 7 is the monther of the deceased, Bhola Oraon. P.W. 8 is the neice of deceased, Bhokhre Oraon and PW. 9 is the sister of the deceased, Bihari Oraon. 10. All the aforesaid eye witnesses who have claimed to the witnesses of the occurrence closely related, have made a radical departure from the story what it was told at the earliest recorded in the fardbeyan, Ext. 2 which formed the basis of the first information report of this case, Ext. 3. The most significant departure made by the witnesses is that iri the first information report the story was that appellant, Kodey Oraon had caused fire-arm injury by pistol to Bihari Oraon which was, to some extent, also supported by the inquest report of deceased, Bihari Oraon as recorded in the inquest reports, Ext. 1/1. The Investigating Officer also found injury likely to be caused by fire-arm. But this story was given up and the story introduced in the evidence of all the witnesses concurently is that the appellant, Kodey Oraon had shot with pistol on deceased, Bhola Oraon who had sustained gun shot injury. It should be noted in this connection that in the first informaton report the story was that there was only one shot used by one of the accused, Kodey Oraon. It should be noted in this connection that in the first informaton report the story was that there was only one shot used by one of the accused, Kodey Oraon. In the evidence of P.W. 6 followed by all the remaining three eye witnesses, a new story has been introduced that Kodey Oraon had caused injury on the fore-head of Bhola Oraon from a very close rang. This new introduction of firing from close range on the fore-head is also not supported by medical evidence. 11. P.W. 10 is the doctor who had hold post-mortem examination on all the three dead bodies on the following day and those post-mortem reports are Exts. 4 to 4/2. The doctor had found no fire-arm injury on the dead body of Bihari Oraon which was the original case told in the first information report. He had found gun shot injury and had also recovered bullet from the dead body of Bhola Oraon as deposed by him. The post-mortem report of Bihari Oraon is Ext. 4 and that of Bhola is Ext. 4/b. The doctor had found incised wound and stab wounds on the dead body of Bihari Oraon. Therefore, the original story of use of fire-arm attributed to appellant. Kodey Oraon is not supported by medical evidence. The doctor had found fire-arm injury on the dead body of Bhola Oraon and had also recovered bullet from his body. The injury had created suc a great impact that the brain matter was also affected. There was no mention in the fardbeyan that the deceased, Bhola Oraon had received any gun shot injury or fire-arm injury which has been consistently introduced in the evidence of all the four eye witnesses. Therefore, the argument advanced on behalf of the appellants that the medical evidence is not in conformity with the prosecution case as told in the fardbeyan, is fully supported by the medical evidence. 12. There is yet another important matter which has been introduced in course of evidence of all the four eye witnesses In the fardbeyan and in the earlier evidences of P.Ws. 6 and 7. 12. There is yet another important matter which has been introduced in course of evidence of all the four eye witnesses In the fardbeyan and in the earlier evidences of P.Ws. 6 and 7. there was no specific evidence that any of the appellants was armed with chura The story of chura was introduced as a matter of convenience when it was detected in the post-mortem report of Bihari Oraon that he had received two stab injuries of different dimensions creating great impact affecting 6th ribs and had entered into the lung. There was absolutely no allegation, no statement, any attribution made to any of the appellants that they had caused any stab injury to any of the three deceased. The story that the appellant, Mantu was armed with chura, has been introduced specially in the evidence of P.W. 7 in his examination-in-chief itself. It should be noted that the original case was that the appellant, Kodey Oraon was armed with pistol and the rest of the appellants had either sword or farsa. There was no mention of chura which was introduced in the evidence as a matter of convenience and to explain the post-mortem report as found on the dead body of Bihari Oraon, as stated above. 13. In view of this nature of evidence introduced subsequently in course of trial making redical departure from the story as told at the earliest, a point has cropped up as to what will be the effect of this on the prosecution case. The obvious effect of such radical and material change introduced in the evidence completely oblitrating the earlier story is that either the witnesses had not seen the actual occurrence or they have given evidence of convenience far from truth otherwise there could not have been any plausible reason for making such a radical change in the very basic structure of the case itself. Such a radical and basic change in the structure of the prosecution case is very fatal and goes at its very root The nature of the evidence told by all the three witnesses during the course of trial making a complete departure from the earlier prosecution case, it itself sufficient to knock out the prosecution case from its bottom The definite structure of the prosecution case which was built up in the first information report by over burdening it in course of evidence to explain certain aspect detected in the medical trial and to suit certain convenience of the witnesses to make the prosecution case natural, has, in fact, destroyed its very foundation. 14. It is settled principle of law and prudence that if a radical departure is made from the prosecution case as told at the earliest, it will be sufficient to discard it because a subsequent material change in the prosecution case will destroy its foundation earlier made with disastrous consequences as the credibility of such witnesses (sic) will become shacky and. no amount of subsequent separate explanation can make them reliable. 15. In this case there is yet another infirmity which can be easily discovered. The first infirmity is that there is complete absence of what to say of any independent witness or any independent corroboration but the witnesses introduced are only ladies of that family. Not a single male has come forward to support the cause of prosecution. This is also a serious reflection on the part of the prosecution as to why it has not brought any single male in order to support the case of such a ghastly nature where three lives have been liquidated in a brutal manner. It is, indeed, unfortunate that in such nature of case the prosecution could not unfold the real state of affairs and actual truth. The prosecution case was introduced in such a way that it was not supported by the medical evidence and by the evidence of that witness in trial who lodged the first information report, being kith and kin of the same family. 16. It was not the case that the prosecution had not examined any witness. The prosecution case was introduced in such a way that it was not supported by the medical evidence and by the evidence of that witness in trial who lodged the first information report, being kith and kin of the same family. 16. It was not the case that the prosecution had not examined any witness. P.W. 11 is the Investigating Officer who has stated in his deposition, in paragraph 10, that he had examined Mangera, Jamuna, brother of deceased, Bhokhere and also examined Somra and Bhothu who were the residents of the nearby places of the place of occurrence. Place of occurrence, in this case, is said to be near the house of appellant, Kodey Oraon on a pucca road but yet nobody had come to support the prosecution case except the females of the affected family. 17. The sequence of events told in the first information report have also undergone change from stage to stage which also indicates that the manner of the occurrence has been changed. It should be noted that the first sequence of the prosecution case introduced in the first information report was that at about 7 P.M. the informant, deceased, Bhokhere, Minu Devi and deceased, Bhola were sitting and waiting for the arrival of Bihari Oraon for the purpose of performing the Agja on that holiday. It is claimed that at 7-30 P.M. Bihari came and went away asking them to wait and again at about 9.30 P.M. when Bihari did not come, then his Bhabhi and others had come and inquired about him and when Bihari came at 9-30 P.M. he was taken away by the accused from the angan and after tieing their hands, had taken them to the tri-junction of the road. It was rightly pointed out that the first information is silent about the time of arrival of Bihari and also how he came. It is said that he was also taken away along with other two deceased whose hands were tied. 18. The other important feature of the case which is absent is that of motive. Why three persons will be killed in such a brutal manner without any apparent cause is unexplained in the F. I. R. or even in the evidence. It is said that he was also taken away along with other two deceased whose hands were tied. 18. The other important feature of the case which is absent is that of motive. Why three persons will be killed in such a brutal manner without any apparent cause is unexplained in the F. I. R. or even in the evidence. No doubt, P.W. 6 has attempted to explain that because of some differences and objection raised by the villagers with regard to throwing of colour on some girls, this occurrence had taken place but, who had thrown colour or any of the deceased had thrown colour, is unexplained in this case. This itself is not sufficient motive for taking away the lives of three persons in such a brutal manner. Therefore, there is complete absence of motive for committing such a crime. 19. I was discussing about the sequence. Sequence has also been changed and the sequence introduced in the evidence of P.W. 1 is that first of all Bhola Oraon and Bhokhre Oraon were taken away and, thereafter, again they came back and took away Bihari. It was said that appellant, Kodey took Bihari on the pretext that he was wanted by Ramjee Paswan and then their hands were tied. Thereafter, the new sequence introduced is that one of the accused was armed with fire-arm and the rest had farsa. Who had farsa is not explained but certainly not with dagger. Some witnesses have stated that first of all the assault was inflicted on Bhola Oraon, then on Bhokhre Oraon and lastly on Bihari. Bhola was assaulted with farsa, talwar and chura. P.W. 7 has stated that first of all Bhola, then Bhokhre and then Bihari were killed. P.W. 8 has said that the dead bodies were found stagged and the dead body of Bihari was last of all. The I.O. has not found the dead body clubbed together at one place but he found the dead bodies lying. 20. There is also some change in the evidence with regard to the weapons which the accused were carrying. Ramjee Paswan is said to have carried sword which is not supported by the evidence of P.Ws. 6, 7 and 9 who have stated in their evidence that he was carrying farsa. Mantu had sword which was dropped but in the evidence it has come that he was carrying chura. 21. Ramjee Paswan is said to have carried sword which is not supported by the evidence of P.Ws. 6, 7 and 9 who have stated in their evidence that he was carrying farsa. Mantu had sword which was dropped but in the evidence it has come that he was carrying chura. 21. It appears that the witnesses have also given somewhat different story before the police than what they have said in their evidence. In the evidence the witnesses have said that Kodey Oraon had shot at Bhola on his head but before the police, it was said that Kodey had shot at Bhola on his chest which is proved by the evidence of P.W. 11. The attention of the witness was drawn and the contradictions have been proved. 22. Another introduction in the case is that deceased, Bhokhore is said to have been assaulted both by chura and farsa which was not the case of the prosecution from before as stated at the earliest. 23. To sum up, it has been noticed that the story of causing injury by fire-arms from Bihari to Bhola has been introduced. It was a very important feature in the whole of the case as told in the first information report which is affecting not only one deceased but the two deceased as no fire-arm injury caused by appellant, Kodey Oraon to Bihari was found on the neck. Fire-arm injury was found on Bhola who was not said to have been assaulted by any fire-arm. The sequence of events including the manner of occurrence has been changed, as noticed above. The nature of the weapons has been changed ana a new story of use of dagger has been introduced giving up the story of farsa. No independent witness has been examined. No motive for such brutal murder of three persons has been stated anywhere in the evidence. Absence of independent witnesses or any male member from the aggrieved family not coming forward to support the prosecution case, ah taking togetner are sufficient to raise reasonable doubt with regard to the veracity and the manner of prosecution case introduced in the evidence of the witnesses. Once a doubt has been raised that the prosecution has not come up with true and clean account of occurrence, then the whole benefit will go to the defence. 24. There is yet another circumstance. Once a doubt has been raised that the prosecution has not come up with true and clean account of occurrence, then the whole benefit will go to the defence. 24. There is yet another circumstance. If the medical evidence is in direct conflict witn inques report and the orral evidence introduced subsequently in this case, what affect it will cause for the prosecution case. Without any other hesitation, it can be straightway concluded that such a conflict on material aspects of the case from that of inquest report or medical evidence including the ocular evidence, will cause disastrous consequence for the prosecution case and on that account the prosecution case can be thrown out. It follows, therefore, that the prosecution has not come forward with clean version nor has succeeded in proving the manner of occurrence it has failed to prove that all or any one of the appellants was responsible for causing the death of any of the three persons. 25. The result is that I am constrained to hold that the prosecution has failed to prove any of the charges, framed against the appellants beyond all reasonable doubts and the appellants were, atleast entitled to get benefit of doubt. 26. In the result, for the reasons stated above, this appeal is allowed. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed against the appellants are set aside. The appellants are directed to be set at liberty at once if not wanted in any other case. 27. I agree.