Honble CHOPRA, J.—This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Udaipur dated 15.6.88 whereby the learned Sess. Judge has acquitted accused Shanker Lal, Pappu @ Pradeep, Logar, Niranjan and Jai Singh of the offences under sections 148, 302 r/w sec. 140 and 129-B I.P.C. but he however held accused appellant Ashok guilty of the offence under section 302 IPC although he acquitted him of the offences u/ss. 148, 120-B, and 302 r/w sec. 149 I.P.C. The learned Sessions Judge has sentenced him for the offence u/sec. 302 I.P.C. to life imprisonment together with a fine of Rs. 50/-and in default to undergo two months R.I. 2. The facts necessary to be noticed for the disposal of this appeal briefly stated are: that on the night intervening between 18th and 19.07.1986, Shri Shanker Lal Kumhar husband of first informant Smt. Basanti Devi was killed by accused appellant Ashok and his companions at about 10 or 10.30 pm. in village Kavita. Deceased Shanker Lal and his wife Smt. Basanti Devi were living in a house constructed on their well. It is alleged that a tempo came at about 9.30 or 10 p.m. The tempo was stopped near the well of Baids and thereafter 5-6 persons alighted from that tempo and went towards village Kavita. They returned back at about 10.30 p.m. and called Shanker Lal who was taking his meals at that time whereupon Shankerlal went to meet them. They went towards the well of Baids and thereafter Mst. Basanti Devi heard the cries of her husband Shanker Lal who went with these accused persons. She ran towards the well of Baids and found that accused Shanker Lal and Pappu @ Pradeep were giving- a Lalkaras that this man should be killed and as soon as they saw her, they immediately boarded the tempo. At that time, she saw that accused Ashok was armed with a knife which was blood stained. She cried for help on which Nawa Gameti, Madhuji Khawas and Dhulji came there. After a few minutes, Dharm-narayanji came there on a Motor Cycle. They were informed about this incident that about six persons came in a tempo and have killed her husband Shanker Lal. Dharamnarayan went in hot pursuit of that tempo and found its number. She cried for help on which Nawa Gameti, Madhuji Khawas and Dhulji came there. After a few minutes, Dharm-narayanji came there on a Motor Cycle. They were informed about this incident that about six persons came in a tempo and have killed her husband Shanker Lal. Dharamnarayan went in hot pursuit of that tempo and found its number. He however could not identify these persons and thereafter he went to Police Station Nai Outpost Badgaon where at about 11.15 p.m. he lodged a report that in tempo No. RST 8434, five to six persons came from Udaipur side and killed Shankerlal on Kavita road & thereafter they have run away in the same tempo. When this report which had been marked as Ex. P. 20, was lodged, Constable Gordhan Lal bearing No. 1536 was sent to the spot and a report was sent to the Police Station, Nai where it was registered as Rapat Roznamcha as 619 at 12.15 am and has been marked as Ex.D.2. On receipt of this information, SHO along with AS!, Prem Singh, Constables Pema Ram, Sangram Singh, Shiv Singh, Man Singh and Nishar Khan went in a Jeep RRY 8233 to village Kavita where it is alleged that at about 1.30 A.M., the statement of Smt. Basanti Devi was recorded and it was sent to the Police Station for recording the F.I.R. The dead body of the deceased was shifted to Udaipur for post mortem. The post mortem report has been marked as Ex. P. 2. The Panchayat Nama Nash Ex.P.4 was prepared. The blood stained Chaddi of the deceased was taken in possession vide memo Ex.P.5. The accused persons were arrested. The tempo 100, was seized on the information of accused Ashok marked as Ex. P. 7. A blood stained Knife was recovered in the presence of motbirs Dalchand and Logar which was sealed and sent for chemical analysis. The Chemical report shows that it was blood stained. The blood found on the smeared soil and on the Chaddi of the deceased was also examined After usual investigation, the case against six accused persons was challaned in the Court of Addl. M.J.M. Udaipur City North from where it was committed for trial to the Court of learned Sessions Judge who charged the accused persons with the aforesaid offences u/ss. 148, 120-B, 302 r/w sec. 149 IPC. M.J.M. Udaipur City North from where it was committed for trial to the Court of learned Sessions Judge who charged the accused persons with the aforesaid offences u/ss. 148, 120-B, 302 r/w sec. 149 IPC. The accused persons did not plead guilty to the charges and claimed trial whereupon the prosecution examined as many as sixteen witnesses. The statements of the accused persons were recorded under sec. 313 Cr.P.C. They examined D.W. 1 Hussaini Bhai Bohra in their defence. After hearing the parties the learned lower Court decided the case as aforesaid and hence this appeal by convicted accused Ashok. The rest of the five accused persons who were his companions, have been acquitted. 3 We have heard Mr. M.M. Singhvi appearing for the accused appellant and Shri H.R. Panwar appearing for the State and have carefully gone through the record of the case. 4. It is not disputed that Shri Shankerlal has died on account of the injuries received by him. His injuries have been proved by P.W. 7 Dr. N.S. Kothari who found two major incised wounds and three incised abrasions and two other abrasions on his body. He has proved his post mortem report ExP.2. The first injury i.e. an incised stab wound was inflicted on the left side of his chest anteriorly in the third costal space in mid clavicular line 8 cm below medieal end of left clavicle by which intercostal muscles were cut and the pluera too was cut and medical border of upper lobe of left lung was cut through and through in an area of 2 0 cm. x 0.5 cm. The pleural cavity contained clotted blood which when measured came to about 500-550 ml. This wound has perforated pericardial space and has cut the left atrium of the heart in the size of 2 cm. x 0.3 cm with cutting of anterior wall of root of aorta in the size of 1 cm. x 0.3 cm. The pericardial cavity was also found full of clotted blood about 250-300 ml. This injury by itself was sufficient to cause of death. The other stab wound was inflicted on his back of the lower chest and the Doctor has opined that all injuries were cumulatively sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. It is, therefore, clear that it is a homicidal death. This injury by itself was sufficient to cause of death. The other stab wound was inflicted on his back of the lower chest and the Doctor has opined that all injuries were cumulatively sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. It is, therefore, clear that it is a homicidal death. The only point that survives for the decision is whether the accused appellant is guilty for causing the murder of Shri Shanker Lal. Shri Shanker Lal belongs to village Kavita. He was married in village Bhuwana with Basanti Devi. Mst Basantis father had no sons and, therefore, he gave his house to Basanti. That probably infuriated Bhanwerlal who happens to be her uncle because Shankerlal who has been committed for trial in this case is son of Shri Bhanwerlal, uncle of Mst. Basanti. It is alleged that this Shankerlal along with accused Ashok & others came to village Kavita at about 9.30 on the night intervening between the 18th and 19.07.1986. They came in a tempo, alighted near the well of Baids, went to the village Kavita and came back. It is alleged that out of these six persons, Smt, Basanti recognised Shankerlal s/o Shri Bhanwarlal, Pappu @ Pradeep and Ashok Kumar. They were accompanied by three more persons. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that after they came back, they gave a call from the road to Shankerlal husband of Smt. Basanti Devi as to what he was doing? On this, Shankerlal, who was taking his meals, cleaned Lis hands and went to meet them. He then went with them towards the well of Balds and from there, Basanti Devi heard two cries of her husband which was Hare-Hare. On this, she ran away towards her husband and found that Shankarlal and Pappu @ Pradeep were telling their companions, ^ekjks lkys dks* i.e. he should be killed. When they saw Basanti coming towards them, they immediately boarded the tempo. At that time, she saw Ashok Kumar was holding a blood stained knife in his hand. Mst. Basanti Devi is the sole eye witness of this occurrence. Now this has to be seen whether implicit reliance can be placed on her testimony to sustain this conviction? 5. When they saw Basanti coming towards them, they immediately boarded the tempo. At that time, she saw Ashok Kumar was holding a blood stained knife in his hand. Mst. Basanti Devi is the sole eye witness of this occurrence. Now this has to be seen whether implicit reliance can be placed on her testimony to sustain this conviction? 5. It has been held by a Division Bench of this Court in Kartar Singh vs. The State (1) that an accused can be convicted even on the basis of the evidence of single eye witness but such a witness must be of sterling worth. If it is found that the single witness to the occurrence is not sticking to the truth, then it is very unsafe to ignore the discrepancies appearing in his or her statement and convict the accused on that basis alone. Our attention was next drawn by Mr. Singhvi to a decision of their lordships of the Supreme Court in Badri vs. State of Rajasthan (2). That was a case where the only eye witness of the occurrence modulated his evidence to suit the prosecution story. Their lordships felt that they are unable to uphold the conviction of the accused on the basis of such a testimony. Thus, the sole test to base a conviction on the testimony of a sole witness is that he or she should be a witness of sterling worth. Now let us see whether her testimony is reliable and whether any conviction can be based on her sole testimony. The substance of the story as put forth in the F.I.R. has been quoted in brief above. Smt. Basanti Devi was examined as P.W. 1 she was stated that at about 10.30 in the night, she and her husband were sitting outside their house on the stairs of the Chabutari and they were taking their meals. There was moonlight on the road and there was also light on her well. At that time, 2-3 boys came in a tempo whom she has identified as the accused persons present in the Court. They first went towards the village and then came back and enquired from Shankerlal as to what he was doing. Shankerlal told them that he was taking his meals and they may also come and join him. At that time, 2-3 boys came in a tempo whom she has identified as the accused persons present in the Court. They first went towards the village and then came back and enquired from Shankerlal as to what he was doing. Shankerlal told them that he was taking his meals and they may also come and join him. On this, the accused persons told him that they have already taken their meals and he should come and show them the way to the market. On this, her husband Shankerlal stopped taking his meals and went with Ashok, Shanker and. Narendra towards the market. These persons belong to village Bhuwana which is not at a far distance from village Kavita. They are local persons and, therefore, it is unthinkable that they will call Shankerlal to show theM the way to the market, it has been stated by Smt. Basanti Devi that they first went to village and thereafter they came back meaning thereby that they were knowing the village and hence there was no reason for them to call Shankerlal to show them the way to the market and, therefore to that extent the testimony of Smt. Basanti Devi appears to be unnatural. Thereafter, it has been stated by her that she heard cries of her husband Shankerlal ^vjs&vjs nkSM+* Earlier, in the F.I.R. she has stated that he cried- ^gjs&gjs* Be that as it may, she has stated that on hearing this, she went running towards her husband and also cried for help and when she reached near the place of the occurrence, she found that three accused persons have already caught hold her husband and accused Ashok was inflicting knife blows on the chest and waist of her husband. The blood was coming or oozing out of his body, he fell down and thereafter these persons ran away in that tempo. Her husband died then and there. On hearing her cries, Madhuji-Khawas, Navalji, Gameti, Dhulji and Dharamnarayan came there. She has been confronted with her statement Ex. The blood was coming or oozing out of his body, he fell down and thereafter these persons ran away in that tempo. Her husband died then and there. On hearing her cries, Madhuji-Khawas, Navalji, Gameti, Dhulji and Dharamnarayan came there. She has been confronted with her statement Ex. P. 1 which was given by her to the police and which forms the basis of F.I.R. in which she has stated that when she reached near the place of the occurrence two accused persons i.e. Shanker and Pappu @ Pradeep were telling that this man should be killed and thereafter when they saw her, they boarded the tempo and at that time, she saw that Ashok was armed with the knife. It was told to her that in this statement, she didnt say that any of these accused persons was holding the body of her husband. She further asked that she has also not stated that she saw Ashok inflicting any blows to her husband on the chest and the waist. Her reply to these questions is that she has stated these facts to the police. This explanation cannot be accepted. Thus, there is an apparent improvement in her statement which she has made in Ex. P. 1 and the one she has made before the Court. 6. Mr. Singhvi has submitted that her statement cannot stand scrutiny. She is an interested witness and, therefore, no reliance can be placed on her statement. Our attention was also drawn to a D.B. decision of this Court rendered in Savia vs. State of Rajasthan (3) wherein the learned Judges have held that the testimony of the solitary witness, in order to seek conviction, should be free from suspicion and should be above board. It should be above reproach and must satisfy the conscience of the Court that it would not be unsafe to convict the culprit on the uncorroborated testimony of such a solitary witness. 7. Even if a single witness happens to be the wife of the deceased, her testimony cannot be brushed aside simply because she may be an interested witness. What is required in the Court in such matters is that her evidence should be clearly scrutinised to find out as to whether she is reliable. In this respect, Mr. 7. Even if a single witness happens to be the wife of the deceased, her testimony cannot be brushed aside simply because she may be an interested witness. What is required in the Court in such matters is that her evidence should be clearly scrutinised to find out as to whether she is reliable. In this respect, Mr. Singhvi has submitted that if her statement is examined on the basis of the checks available on record, it will prove that she is totally an unreliable witness and this case has been cooked-up against the accused person. In this respect, he has submitted that Mst. Basanti Devi has stated that she was taking meals with her husband outside the house on the stairs leading to their Chabutara. Firstly when the entire house was there and even a chabutra was also there then there was no reason for them to take the meals on the stairs leading to Chabutra. Secondly, the husband of Smt. Basanti Devi had already died and she kept the dead body of her husband in her lap. The witnesses have arrived there but nobody has stated that thali in which they were taking meals was removed from there and even at the time of the site inspection, no thali was found there. Doctor has categorically stated that no food was found in the stomach and the intestines were also totally empty. That clearly belies the theory that they were taking the meals. The learned Lower Court has observed that they might have only started taking the meals. Even if they have started then too, some food particles should have been found in the stomach or intestines and this clearly belies the theory that they were taking the meals. This theory was probably invented to show that they were sitting outside their house so that it may be believed that they had an opportunity to recognise the persons who had alighted from the tempo in the moonlight or in the light of the bulb which was burning on their well. 8. P.W. 13 S.H.O. Roop Shanker has categorically stated that the distance of the house of Shankerlal from the place of the occurrence which has been shown as place No. 5 in the site plan Ex. P. 15, is at a distance of about 260 ft. 8. P.W. 13 S.H.O. Roop Shanker has categorically stated that the distance of the house of Shankerlal from the place of the occurrence which has been shown as place No. 5 in the site plan Ex. P. 15, is at a distance of about 260 ft. The place wherein the bulb was burning is at a distance of 200 ft. and the house of the deceased is at a distance of 60 ft. from the room which was existing on the well and thus, there was a distance of about 250 to 260 ft. The well of the Baids is situated at a much greater distance from that place. The tempo was stopped near the well of the Baids. In the best of the moonlight supported by the light of the bulb which was burning on the roof of the farm house, it could not have given such a light in which a person sitting at place 10-A in the site plan, could have recognised the persons who have alighted from the tempo. In this respect, he drew our attention to the Criminal Investigation 5th Edition by R.L. Jackson where on page 159, the learned Author has observed that by moonlight one can recognise, when the moon is at the quarter, persons at a distance of from twenty one feet, in bright moonlight at from twenty three to thirty three feet; and at the very brightest period of the full moon, at a distance of from thirty three to thirty six feet and in tropical countries the distances for moonlight may be increased, even if bulb-light was existing on the roof of the well of the room which was at a distance of 200 ft. from the place of the occurrence, identification of the accused persons from that distance was impossible because the distance was almost one furlong and in the best of the moonlight, one cannot recognise the man from that distance either in the moonlight or with the help of the bulb light along with the moonlight. This is further clear from the fact that the names of the assailants were not disclosed by her to anyone of the persons who had reached the place of the occurrence soon after the occurrence. 9. In this respect, the prosecution examined P.W. 3 Nawa Gameti who has stated that when he went there on hearing cries of Mst. This is further clear from the fact that the names of the assailants were not disclosed by her to anyone of the persons who had reached the place of the occurrence soon after the occurrence. 9. In this respect, the prosecution examined P.W. 3 Nawa Gameti who has stated that when he went there on hearing cries of Mst. Basanti Devi, she was only weeping. She did not tell anything. She was inflicting blows on her breast with her own hands. P.W. 5 Dhulji Khawas has also been examined and he has stated that on hearing the cries of Basanti, he went there. Shankars dead body was lying in the lap of Smt. Basanti Devi. Basanti Devi was telling that enemies have got him killed. She did not take anybodys name. P.W. 16 Dharam-narayan has also been examined and he has stated that when he went near the place of the occurrence where Smt. Basanti Devi was sitting with the dead body of Shankerlal be found that she. was weeping. He asked her as to what has happened upon which Basanti replied that somebody has killed her husband Shankerlal and has gone away. He was confronted with certain portions of his police statement and he has stated that he did not give any such statement wherein Basanti is said to have told him that 5-6 persons came in a tempo and have killed her husband with a knife. It is therefore, clear from these statements that the names of the assailants were not disclosed to these persons although they reached the place the occurrence soon after the occurrence on hearing her cries because by that time, Smt. Basanti Devi did not know who has killed her husband Shanker Lal. It is possible that she might have heard his cries from her house and must have gone near the dead body of her husband and must have cried for help also. To this extent, her statement is believable but she cannot be believed when she states that she has seen somebody inflicting blows to the body of her husband with a knife or that she has identified anybody going in a tempo after the incident was over. If that be so, she should have been the first person to disclose the names of these persons. There was no reason for her to keep back the names of those persons. If that be so, she should have been the first person to disclose the names of these persons. There was no reason for her to keep back the names of those persons. It may be that for some time, somebody may be stunned but that may be for ten to fifteen minutes but when it was enquired from her as to what has happened, she must have disclosed what has happened and how it has happened, if she has actually seen the occurrence. Dha-ram Narayan was sent to report the matter to the police who went in hot pursuit of the tempo to note its number. If she has identified these persons whom she has named in her statement Ex.P.1 then she should have disclosed these names to Dharam Narayan and must have told him that he must mention those names in the report that he may lodge with the police. She did not disclose their names because she did not know them and she had not seen the occurrence and, therefore, she could not say to who were the assailants of her husband. - 10. P.W. 2 Narainlal is the son of deceased Shankerlal, born to Shanker Lal from his first wife whereas Smt. Basanti is his second wife. At about" 10.30 or 11.00 P.M. one Laxmilal Paliwal and Dhulaji Khawas came to him and told him that his father has been killed. Five to seven persons had come in a tempo and they have inflicted knife blows to Shankerlal and he has been killed. He immediately came to his house, his mother was there, lot of persons were also there and they were also telling that 5-6 persons came in a tempo and have killed Shankerlal. He has stated that when this thing was being talked about by the persons assembled there, Smt. Basanti was very much there. She did not say that out of these five-six persons, she has identified these three persons. By that time, an hour or more has expired and still she did not disclose the names of these persons. This P.W. 2 Narain Lal has stated that he enquired from his mother about assailants of his father and at that time, his mother told him that his father has been killed by Mangiya. On this, he became furious and wanted to kill Mangiya but he was controlled by the villagers. This P.W. 2 Narain Lal has stated that he enquired from his mother about assailants of his father and at that time, his mother told him that his father has been killed by Mangiya. On this, he became furious and wanted to kill Mangiya but he was controlled by the villagers. He has stated that Mangiya is his brother in relation. Thus, till Shri Narain Lal went to his house and talked with Smt. Basanti, it clearly appears that the names of these assailants were not known to Basanti Devi. Basanti Devi categorically told him that Mangiya has got his father killed. This statement which have been given by Narain Lal is supported by P.W. 5 Dhulji. It was stated by him in his cross-examination that Narainlal told that he will kill his enemy Mangiya. They then persuaded him not to go to him and kill him. Thus, till Narain Lal reached his house and enquired from his mother the names of the assailants of his father, the name of Ashok was never taken by Smt. Basanti Devi. For the first time, when the S.H.O. came there at about 1.30 A.M. this name has been taken by Smt. Basanti Devi and, therefore, it appears to be an engineered F.I.R. which has been prepared after the investigation started. 11. Mr. Singhvi has submitted that when the sole witness of the occurrence does not tell the names of these assailants immediately after the occurrence then it creates doubt in a prosecution story and it should be thrown away. In this respect, he has placed reliance on a decision of their lordships of the Supreme Court rendered in Harbhajan Singh vs. State of J. & K. (4) where in their lordships observed that wherein the prosecution of an accused for murder of a girl by a rifle, it is found that the only eye witness (the girls father) failed to mention the names of accused to the neighbours who came to the scene soon-after the occurrence, that will only show that that accused persons or the assailants of his daughter were not known to the witness; Mr. Singhvi also placed reliance on a decision of their lordships of the Supreme Court in State of Orissa Vs. Singhvi also placed reliance on a decision of their lordships of the Supreme Court in State of Orissa Vs. Brahmanand (5) wherein also it has been observed that where in a murder case, the entire prosecution case depended on the evidence of a person claiming to be an eye-witness of the incident and this witness did not disclose the name of the assailants for a day and half after the incident and the explanation offered for non-disclosure was unbelievable, it was held that such a non disclosure was a serious infirmity which destroyed the credibility of the evidence of the witness and, therefore, their lordships observed that the High Court was correct in rejecting the testimony of such a witness being untrustful. Our attention was next drawn to a decision of their lordships of the Supreme Court in Panda Nana Kare vs. State of Maharashtra (6) wherein also, the identity of the accused was not disclosed immediately but it was disclosed belatedly and, therefore, the testimony of the sole eye witness was not believed and the conviction for murder was set aside. 12. In this respect, Mr. Panwar has placed reliance on a decision of their lordships of the Supreme Court rendered in Narayan Singh vs. State of M.P. (7) wherein their lordships observed that merely because the sole eye-witness did not immediately disclose the names of the accused to the inmates of the family of the deceased, it could not be said that there was a fatal defect in the prosecution case. That was a case where P.W.11 who was the sole eye witness disclosed the name of the assailants after 15 minutes to the family members because for 15 minutes, it is alleged that he was dazed That was quite natural. Here too, for the time being,, it may be considered that Basanti Devi might have been dazed on account of the death of her husband but when she was asked as to what has happened, it was incumbent On her to disclose the names because she was conscious enough to send Dharam Narayan in hot pursuit of the tempo to note its number and then to go and inform the Police. She also did not disclose the name of Ashok to her son Narain. She also did not disclose the name of Ashok to her son Narain. Later, she took the name of Mangiya and, therefore, it is clear that till S.H.O. reached the place of the occurrence, name of Ashok was never taken by Smt. Basanti Devi as assailant of her husband. Had she seen the occurrence and identified accused Ashok and his companions, she would certainly have taken their names to the witnesses who had assembled there to enquire from her regarding the occurrence. 13. Be that as it may, it has been argued by Mr. Singhvi that this Ex. P. 1 is a document which has been prepared after the investigation started. Ex.P.1 was recorded at 1.30 A.M. It was sent for recording the formal F.I.R. in the Thana and that was done at 7.00 A.M. but this F.I.R. number does not find any place either in the post mortem report Ex. P. 2 or in Panchnama Lash Ex.P. 4 or in Pharad Supardginama Lash Ex. P. 6. Although the post mortem has taken place at 9.00 A.M. and all other steps in the investigation were taken in the morning. It was also contended that it has reached the Magistrate on 21.07.1986 at 7.00 A.M. All these facts clearly create a serious doubt as to whether Ex.P.1 is a spontaneous document. Even in this statement which has been recorded, it has not been disclosed by Mst. Basanti Devi that she has seen Ashok inflicting injuries to her husband. The accused persons were six in number. Even if she has seen Ashok holding a blood stained knife, it is not a conclusive proof of the fact that he alone was the assailant of Shanker Lal. Some body else might have inflicted injuries to Shanker Lal husband of Basanti Devi and might have handed over the knife to him. That hypothesis cannot be ruled out and, therefore, even to that extent also, conclusion of the learned lower Court that actually she had seen Ashok inflicting injuries to the deceased cannot be believed. This material fact that she saw Ashok inflicting injuries to her husband is totally absent in the F.I.R. and, therefore, to that extent, her statement cannot be believed. This material fact that she saw Ashok inflicting injuries to her husband is totally absent in the F.I.R. and, therefore, to that extent, her statement cannot be believed. In this respect, reliance has been placed on a decision of their lordships of the Supreme Court in Ram Kumar Pande vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (8) where in Para 9, their lordships observed as under:- "No doubt, an F.I.R. is previous statement which can, strictly speaking, be only used to corroborate or contradict the maker of it. But, in this case, it had been made by the father of the murdered boy to whom all the important facts of the occurrence, so far as they were known up to 9.15 P.M. on 23.3. 1970, were bound to have been communicated. If his daughters had seen the appellant inflicting a blow on Harbinder Singh, the father would certainly have mentioned it in the F.I.R. We think that omissions of such important facts, affecting the probabilities of the case, are relevant under section 11 of the Evidence Act in judging the veracity of the prosecution case". 14. Even if the F.I.R. is given by a lay woman then also it is expected of her that she will distinguish between the fact as to whether she has seen a person inflicting injuries to her husband and whether she only saw a person running with a knife and, therefore, to this extent, the authority cited by Mr. Panwar in Gurnam Kaur vs. Bakshis Singh (9) cannot help the case of the prosecution. 15. It was next contended by Mr. Singhvi that in this case, the real F.I.R. is Ex. D. 2 which was recorded in the police station on the basis of Ex. P. 20. In this F.I.R. it has been clearly mentioned that Shankerlal has been killed by five-six persons who had come in a tempo from Udaipur side. They have inflicted injuries to him with a knife. It is true that the names of the assailants were not there in the F.I.R. but that is not essentials. This information clearly indicates that Shankerlal has been killed with a knife by 5-6 persons came in a tempo from Udaipur side and, therefore in our view Ex. D. 2 is the real F.I.R. 16. It was contended by Mr. It is true that the names of the assailants were not there in the F.I.R. but that is not essentials. This information clearly indicates that Shankerlal has been killed with a knife by 5-6 persons came in a tempo from Udaipur side and, therefore in our view Ex. D. 2 is the real F.I.R. 16. It was contended by Mr. Panwar that Rapat Roznamcha recorded in a police outpost cannot be treated as F.I.R. and in this respect, he placed reliance on a D.B. decision of this Court in Surja Ram & others vs. State of Rajasthan (10) wherein their lordships observed that entry made in Rojnamcha of police outpost, cannot be equated to FIR. Here, the matter did not end with the recording of the report in the police outpost. A constable was sent to the place of the occurrence in pursuance of this information. Then this information was sent to Police Station where it was recorded as Ex. D. 2 and it was on this information that the S.H.O. alongwith other Constables started to the place of the occurrence and, therefore, this can safely be treated as a FIR and to this extent, Ex. P. 1 is a statement recorded u/sec. 161 and cannot be treated as a F.I.R. Mr. Panwar next contended that before the statement of Smt. Basanti Devi was recorded, no investigation had started except that the S.H.O. went to the spot alongwith A.S.I., and certain other Constables. All other steps in the investigation were taken after the statement of Smt. Basanti Devi was recorded and thereafter even if it is held that the information given to the police station Nali as also Outpost Badgaon can be treated as F.I.R. as the information of the crime was sufficiently conveyed to it then too, this should be treated as additional F.I.R. which has been recorded before the investigation was actually started. 17. Mr. Singhvi however submitted that even if it is treated as an additional F.I.R. then too, this is an ante-time document because the F.I.R. number is not recorded in number of the documents e.g. post mortem report, Panchayat Nama Lash etc. 18. The contention of Mr. 17. Mr. Singhvi however submitted that even if it is treated as an additional F.I.R. then too, this is an ante-time document because the F.I.R. number is not recorded in number of the documents e.g. post mortem report, Panchayat Nama Lash etc. 18. The contention of Mr. Panwar is that the F.I.R. was recorded by the Police Station at 7.00 A.M. and thereafter its number must have been conveyed to the S.H.O. wherever he was at that time and, therefore, certain documents which were prepared in the earlier hours the morning, might not have been there in the F.I.R. but that does not mean that this statement was not recorded in the night. 19. We find some force in the submission of Mr. Panwar that this Ex. P. 1 should be treated as an additional F.I.R. and simply because its number is not mentioned in some of the documents which were prepared as a result of the early investigation, it cannot be said that it is an ante dated F.I.R. 20. It was also contended by Mr. Singhvi that Mst. Basanti Devi has not disclosed the place where she was sitting. That place has been very much disclosed by her that she was sitting on the stairs leading to the Chabutra of her house. It might not have been pin pointed in the site plan but that hardly matters and moreover this may amount to a statement given to police during investigation. Of-course, the police could have located that place where thali was lying and it could have shown in the site plan as has been observed by the Division Bench of this Court in Hakumat Rai vs. State of Rajasthan (11) but even if much importance is not given to this aspect of the matter, then too, it is crystal clear to us that Smt. Basanti has not seen as to who has killed her husband and she was not identified the persons who have killed her husband. If she had actually identified the assailants of her husband, she would have immediately disclosed the names of those persons to the witnesses who have arrived at the place of occurrence on hearing her cries. If she had actually identified the assailants of her husband, she would have immediately disclosed the names of those persons to the witnesses who have arrived at the place of occurrence on hearing her cries. Specially she would have disclosed their names to Dharam Narayan who was sent to report the matter to the police and would certainly have disclosed their names to Narayan who happens to be the son of Shankerlal. Thus, the view that has been taken by the learned Sessions Judge appears to be a conjectural and he has wrongly placed implicit reliance on the testimony of this witness. Actually on the basis of the checks available on record, her testimony cannot be characterised as trustworthy and no implicit reliance can be placed on her testimony. Simply because she was first to reach the place of the occurrence, it does not mean that she had seen the assailants of her husband and, therefore, this conviction recorded against the accused appellant Ashok cannot be sustained. 21. In the result, we accept this appeal, set aside the conviction and sentence recorded against accused appellant Ashok and acquit him of the charge u/s 302 IPC and further quash the sentence imposed against him. If he is not wanted in any other case, he be set a liberty forthwith. 22. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly on merits.