V. H. BHAIRAVIA, J. ( 1 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 2 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 3 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 4 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 5 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 6 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 7 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 8 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 9 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 10 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 11 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 12 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 13 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 14 ) THE learned Counsel submitted that the inquest panchanama is important piece of evi- dence and statements of the witnesses being examined at inquest should be recorded in full. In support of his submission he has relied on the decision rendered in the case of Pachudayan v. Emperor reported in 1911 Cri. Law Journal (Vol. 12 124 wherein it has been observed as under: Considering the important nature for the evidence which is generally furnished by the results of post-mortem examination the results of the observation external and internal should be fully recorded. There is nothing in the Criminal Procedure Code which prevents the statements of wit- nesses examined at an inquest being recorded in full. On the other hand a verbatim report of such statements may often be of great use to the Court in testing the value of the evidence subsequently given. ( 15 ) THERE is no dispute with the ratio of the judgments referred to hereinabove but the same is not applicable to the facts of the present case since facts of that case are quite different than the facts of the present case. This court therefore does not see any substance in this argument. The learned Counsel has referred to the procedure prescribed under Sections 154 and 174 of the Cr. P. Code. Section 154 of the Cr. P. Code is regarding information and cognizable case and power of investigation and Section 174 of the Cr. P. Code relates to inquiry and inquest report to be made Section 174 prescribes procedure to be followed by the police. There is no such provision or procedure which requires to refer the name of the informant in the inquest report. However it is always desirable to refer such prima facie information which has been gathered by the police officer at the time of drawing inquest report. There is no such provision or procedure which requires to refer the name of the informant in the inquest report. However it is always desirable to refer such prima facie information which has been gathered by the police officer at the time of drawing inquest report. But it is not necessary that the name of the informant must be referred in the inquest panchanama that at whose instance investigation has been carrried out. If that is not done it would not harm the prosecution case. ( 16 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 17 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 18 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 19 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 20 ) XXX xxx xxx . ( 21 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 22 ) XXX xxx xxx ( 23 ) XXX xxx xxx .