JUDGMENT U.K. Verma, J. - This government appeal is against the acquittal of Narendra Kumar, Darogha, Vishambhar, Aswani Kumar, Iqbal Bahadur, Rajeshwar and Sokha of the charges under Sections 302 read with Section 149, I.P.C. and of yishambhar, Narendra Kumar, Ashwani Kumar, Rajeshwar Da'rogha and Iqbal under Section 148, I.P.C. and of Sokha under Section 147, I.P.C. 2. The prosecution case is that in the year 1972, the complainant Satya Narain had lodged report against Vishambhar respondent and his cousion Jhullar for committing theft. He had also litigation with Narendra Kumar respondent wherein he was successful. The respondents for the above reason had become inimical to the complainant. In the evening preceding the incident, the respondents had heated exchange of words with Lallan deceased when he expressed resentment about the cattle of Vishambhar respondent having strayed inside his field. In the night between 30.11.74 and 1.12.74 when Lallan, Girish Kumar and Ram Suchit deceased were sleeping in the room by the side of the tubewell which Lallan used to operate the respondents Vishambhar with a gun, Narendra Kumar, Ashwani Kumar and Rajeshwar with Gandasa, Darogha and Iqbal Bahadur with spear and Sokha with lathi made murderous assault on them. The complainant Satya Narain (P.W. 1) who was irrigating his field two hundred fifty yards away arrived with his brother Rang Nath and his nephew Ramji and also Golai (P.W.3) flashing their torches, on hearing the loud squeaky sound made by the deceased before they died. The others who arrived were Dhanpat (P.W. 2) and his brother Ram Dayal along with Ganesh and Vipat who too had been irrigating their field in the vicinity. On being challenged, the respondent Vishambhar fired from his gun towards the witnesses but they had a providential escape. They succeeded in over powering and snatching his gun but the respondents including Visharnbha managed to run away. 3. The factum of the murder of Lallan, Girish Kumar and Ram Suchit in the room by the side of the tubewell of Satya Narain which had been satisfactorily proved by the prosecution was not seriously challenged by the respondents. They, however, denied their complicity in the crime. The police according to them obtained the gun of Vishambhar from him and cooked the false case that it had been seized from him while he was trying to flee from the scene of the incident. They, however, denied their complicity in the crime. The police according to them obtained the gun of Vishambhar from him and cooked the false case that it had been seized from him while he was trying to flee from the scene of the incident. The respondents have set up this case in defence that Lallan deceased had illicit relationship with a girl named Rama Devi who had another paramour named Janardan Lallan had been done to death along with Ram Suchit and Girish in the earlier part of the night between 30.11.74 and 1.12.74 because of his loose morals. 4. We have gone through the evidence on record and the elaborate judgment of Sri B.N.S. Srivastava, the learned II Additional Sessions Judge, Allahabad. He has discussed thoroughly as to how he found not only the motive alleged for the crime to be inadequate but how he was of the view that none of the witnesses examined by the prosecution could have been present near the scene of occurrence to be able to see the assailants. He did not rely upon the prosecution story that the gun of Vishambhar had been seized from him. The circumstances of the case he has discussed, belied the prosecution version in this regard. He further has pointed that the oral evidence adduced was in conflict with medical evidence for he was of the view that the deceased had not been provided opportunity to make any sound. He also did not believe the prosecution allegation that the respondent had been identified in the light of the torches as no recovery memps in respect of them had been prepared. 5. The inquest report shows that all the three deceased had been found lying on their beds and there were heavy injuries above their neck given simultaneously or else the bodies of all the three could not be on their cots in identical postures. We too feel that after the infliction of the heavy blows the deceased could not have made any squeaky sound as is the prosecution story. The postmortem report indicates that undigested food had been found in the stomach of the deceased. This also shows that the probabilities are that the incident did not take place at the time alleged by the prosecution but within four to five ? hours after taking of the meals by the deceased. 6. The postmortem report indicates that undigested food had been found in the stomach of the deceased. This also shows that the probabilities are that the incident did not take place at the time alleged by the prosecution but within four to five ? hours after taking of the meals by the deceased. 6. It next is to be seen that the Investigating Officer had not made a note specifically that he had found the fields of the P.Ws irrigated. That being the position it could not be believed with assurance beyond reasonable doubt that the P.Ws, had been irrigating their field nearby at the time of the incident and happened to reach near the tubewell while the respondents were fleeing away. It is also unlikely that Lallan deceased could have gone to sleep without putting off the tubewell engine as is the prosecution story. 7. The fact that Rama Devi daughter of Kewla Prasad lived near the house of Lallan deceased was admitted by Dhanpat (P.W. 2). It was also not dispute that Janardan the son of Raj Kishore was also living in the vicinity. The Gauna of Rama Devi had been performed 11/2years after the date of the incident. There also appear to be a ring of truth in the defence stand that Lallan deceased had been carrying on with Smt. Rama Devi. In this context, the circumstance that the private part of Lallan had been cut cannot be lost sight of. 8. The Additional Sessions Judge could not be said to be unjustified in his observation that it was improbable that the gun of Vishambhar could have been recovered in the manner alleged by the prosecution. The facts that no one had been injured by the gun and none of the assailants who were armed to teeth inflicted any injury on those who seized the gun from Vishambhar, show that the prosecution version is highly improbable. In this connection this circumstance is also important that in a number of documents scribed at the initial stage during investigation, there is no indication that a case had been registered for attempt to murder by the gun of Vishambhar. The Additional Sessions Judge, there fore, had justifiably concluded that the story of the seizure of the gun from Vishambhar was a concoction. The Additional Sessions Judge, there fore, had justifiably concluded that the story of the seizure of the gun from Vishambhar was a concoction. There is no good ground for interference with the finding of facts arrived at by the Additional Sessions Judge on the above points. The respondents had rightly been acquitted of the charges levelled against them. 9. The appeal is dismissed. The respondents are on bail under the order of this Court dated 26.4.79. They need not surrender to their bail bonds which are discharged.