JUDGMENT D. P. Sood, J.—This judgment would dispose of the Reference No. I of 1992 received from the learned Sessions Judge, Kangra Division at Dharamshala, seeking the confirmation of sentence of death imposed upon the accused Prem Chand with respect to the commission of murder of an old woman Smt Dhobi Devi and Miss Madhu, a minor aged 3 years besides an attempt to commit murder of Pawan Kumar (PW-4), a minor aged 10 years ; AND, Criminal Appeal No. 196 of 1992, filed by the appellant Prem Chand against his conviction under sections 302, 307 and 382 of the Indian Penal Code, arising from the same incident. The prosecution case lies in a short compass. Deceased Dhobi Devi was married to Majnu Ram. At the material time, Sh Majnu Ram and his son Krishan were working at Kullu. Smt. Kanta Devi (PW 8) was married to Krishan. Smt. Leela Devi, daughter of deceased Dhobi Devi was married to the brother of the accused, namely, Ram Lai alias Bhinda. Pawan Kumar (PW-4) injured, is the son of Bhinda, 2. The case of the prosecution further is that Bhinda Ram was not providing the necessities of life to Smt. Leelo DevL Resultantly, both, Leelo Devi and her son Pawan Kumar (PW-4) used to reside with deceased Dhobi Devi at Village Sakri, Police Station, Baijnath, District Kangra. Smt. Leelo Devi used to work in the fields for some time. Thereafter she had also left for Kulu where her brother Krishan and father were residing On the relevant date and time of occurrence, only deceased Smt. Dhobi Devi, her grandson Pawan Kumar (PW-4) and Miss Madhu-the other victim, were the occupants of the house located at village Sakri. 3. The occurrence took place on the intervening night of 11th and I2th February 1992. As per the prosecution, accused Prem Chand had visited the house of Smt. Dhobi Devi on 10-2-1992 m the evening. He took his meals in the company of all the three occupants, i. e. both the deceased and the injured. Meanwhile, Geeta Devi (FW-6) wife of Udiio Ram (PW-7) came to fetch milk from the house of Smt. Dhobi Devi. AC that time the accused was silting alongwith the deceased Smt. DhDbi Devi and other near the hearth. PW-6 enquired about the whereabouts of the accused upon which Srnt. Meanwhile, Geeta Devi (FW-6) wife of Udiio Ram (PW-7) came to fetch milk from the house of Smt. Dhobi Devi. AC that time the accused was silting alongwith the deceased Smt. DhDbi Devi and other near the hearth. PW-6 enquired about the whereabouts of the accused upon which Srnt. Dhobi Devi apprised her that the accused was the real brother of her son-in-law Ram Lai alias Bhinda and he had come as a guest. On the following morning the accused is stated to have left the house but be returned there late at night. A dog had been kept by Smt Dhobi Devi in her house. On his return on IS-2-1992, late at night, the accused gave a call to Smt. Dhobi Devi to tether her dog upon which she enquired about the identity of the person. The accused is stated to have replied that he is the same person who had come yesterday night to her house. The dog was tethered and the accused then entered the house of the deceased. The accused was asked by Smt. Dhobi Devi about his meals upon which he showed his willingness to have kheer which was prepared and all of them enjoyed the same. Thereafter Miss Madhu deceased slept with her grand-mother Smt. Dhobi Devi and Pawan Kumar (PW-4) slept with his real uncle-the accused. 4. During the night, the incident in question occurred allegedly in the manner that the accused gagged the mouth of Pawan Kumar while lights were on. He gave a danda blow to Smt. Dhobi Devi. Immediately, Pawan Kumar (PW-4) heard that his maternal grand-mother Smt. Dhobi Devi was directing him to free the dog who was tethered. Pawan Kumar (PW-4) took out the muffler from his mouth and ran towards the stairs. He had hardly covered 2 or 3 stairs when the accused caught hold of him from the neck and caused injuries on his head with the help of a iron pipe, ordinarily, used by the villagers to burn the fire. Thereafter, the accused caught hold of PW 4 Pawan Kumar and put his neck on the threshold of the door and gave darati blow causing injuries on his neck too. 5. After committing the murder of Smt. Dhobi Devi the accused put bundles of quilts of her and her minor grand-daughter Miss Madhu who was sleeping with her. Thereafter, the accused caught hold of PW 4 Pawan Kumar and put his neck on the threshold of the door and gave darati blow causing injuries on his neck too. 5. After committing the murder of Smt. Dhobi Devi the accused put bundles of quilts of her and her minor grand-daughter Miss Madhu who was sleeping with her. She latter died due to suffocation caused by the weight of the quilt and subsequent thereto, the accused inserted sansi9 "an instrument of iron" in the rectum of Smt. Dhobi Devi The accused thereafter searched the boxes and took the entire jewellery of Smt. Dhobi Devi and her daughter-in-law, Kanta Devi, and silently left the place of occurrence. On the fateful day, Smt Kanta Devi (PW-8) had gone in the company of her nanad to village Majhrena to see her off in her in-laws house. 6. On 12-2-19v2, at about,9 a. m. Smt. Ajudhia wife of Prem Chand (PW-5) went to the house of Smt. Dhobi Devi deceased in order to give water to the buffalo which was tethered in the cow-shed of the deceased. She used to call the deceased Smt Dhobi Devi as chachi. At that time took she gave call to the deceased but received no response. As such she kept the water pot on the ground and went inside the room whereupon she found that lights were on and doors were also open. Smt. Dhobi Devi and her grand-daughter Madhu were found underneath the bundle of quilts and injured Pawan Kumar (PW-4) was found lying in a serious condition. On seeing this, she raised an alarm that some one had murdered 5mt. Dhobi Devi and the children. Prem Chand (PW-5) was attracted by the alarm so raised and he immediately came to the house of the deceased Smt Dhobi Devi, went inside and found that Pawan Kumar was still breathing. He removed the bundle of quilts and found Smt. Dhobi Devi and Madhu dead. He also found sansi9 having been inserted in the rectum of Smt. Dhobi Devi. He immediately informed the Pradhan Udho Ram (PW-7) and thereafter both of them went to the police station and lodged the report. 7. On the same day 12-2-1992 at 10.iO a. m. the police immediately visited the spot, inspected the scene of occurrence, got the dead bodies photographed from Satish Kumar Sharma (PW-18). He immediately informed the Pradhan Udho Ram (PW-7) and thereafter both of them went to the police station and lodged the report. 7. On the same day 12-2-1992 at 10.iO a. m. the police immediately visited the spot, inspected the scene of occurrence, got the dead bodies photographed from Satish Kumar Sharma (PW-18). In the meanwhile Pawan Kumar (PW-4) was immediately shifted to and admitted in the hospital at Palampur, where he responded well to the treatment and made a statement that offence has been committed by his chachu—Prera Chand, accused. The Investigating Officer prepared the inquest report qua the dead body of Smt Dhobi Devi and Miss Madhu and later despatched the bodies for conducting the autopsy. Statements of various witnesses were recorded. Site-plan of the place of occurrence was also prepared. On conducting a raid, the accused was arrested on 13-2-1992 in the morning time. The blood stained wearing apparels, namely, shirt (Ex. P-33), jersey (Ex. P-36) and pattu (Ex. P-37) were also taken into possession by the police Later, on interrogation, he made disclosure statement and got recovered the ornaments belonging to the deceased Dhobi Devi and Kanta Devi (PW-8) concealed in his house. The stolen articles were taken into possession by the police. The Investigating Officer also obtained the report of the Chemical Examiner and Forensic Science Laboratory. After completion of the investigation the accused was prosecuted for the com mission of the offence under sections 302, 307 and 382 of the Indian Penal Code. 8. The learned Sessions Judge, on consideration of the material collected by the police, framed charges for the commission of the offences to which the accused abjured the guilt and pleaded false implication. 9. In his statement under section 313, Cr. P, G.f the marriage of the daughter of the deceased Smt Dhobi Devi with his brother, his visits to the house of deceased Dhobi Devi but prior to 3-1/2 years and further factum of Pawan Kumar (nephew) residing in the house of Dhobi Devi at the relevant time were admitted by the accused. However he denied his presence on 10-2-1992 and 11-2-1992 in the house of the deceased Dhobi Devi. Regarding his arrest on 13-2-1992, he stated that the police had come to his house at 1.45 p. m. and arrested him. He further states that he did not make any disclosure statements and nothing was got recovered from him. However he denied his presence on 10-2-1992 and 11-2-1992 in the house of the deceased Dhobi Devi. Regarding his arrest on 13-2-1992, he stated that the police had come to his house at 1.45 p. m. and arrested him. He further states that he did not make any disclosure statements and nothing was got recovered from him. He explained that the police had asked him to put his thumb impressions on the blank papers. As per him, the jewellery was shown to him in the police station. He had no enmity with Udho Ram (PW-7) but claimed that the prosecution witnesses deposed against him at the instance of—Pradhan Udho Ram. He further pointed out that wife of his brother Bhinda never went to live with his brother at village Killi and on such suspicion he was roped in the case. The wit nesses are close relations of the deceased and that is why they have deposed against him. He also stated that he used to treat Pawan Kumar as his own son and then categorically he claimed that he did not visit the house of Dhobi Devi for the last 3-1/2 years. 10. The prosecution produced 20 witnesses in support of its case. No defence evidence has been adduced by the accused. 11. The learned trial Court, on appraisal of the evidence, found the following circumstances having been proved by the prosecution in the instant case. (i) That on 10-2-1992 and on 11-2-1992 the accused came in the house of Dhobi Devi deceased. (ii) Pawan Kumar injured witness was living in the house of Dhobi Devi and this fact has been admitted by the accused. (iii) Pawan Kumar received grievous injuries seven in number from the hand of the accused. (iv) Accused is the real chacha’ of Pawan Kumar and he made no mistake to identify the accused on both the occasions i. e. 10-2-1992 and 11-2-1992. (v) The accused, after committing murder of Dhobi Devi and Madhu aged three years caused grievous injuries to Pawan Kumar, removed the jewellery from the house and silently left the house during the intervening night of 11th and 12th February, 1992. (v) The accused, after committing murder of Dhobi Devi and Madhu aged three years caused grievous injuries to Pawan Kumar, removed the jewellery from the house and silently left the house during the intervening night of 11th and 12th February, 1992. (vi) The ornaments, which were removed by the accused from the house of Dhobi Devi after committing the double murder, were got recovered by him after making the disclosure statement from his house, (vii) The ornaments have been duly identified by Kanta Devi (PW-8) in the presence of the Executive Magistrate Sh. Salic Ram (PW-10). (viii) The accused was arrested on 13-2-1992 when the name of accused was disclosed by Pawan Kumar from his house. The arrest has been admitted by the accused. (ix) The accused, after committing the murder put bundle of quilts on the bodies of Smt. Dhobi Devi and Miss Madhu, aged 3 years. Madhu died due to suffocation as per report of doctor. Madhu was minor and it was not possible for her to remove the weighty quilts from her body and died. (x) It is also proved on record that death of Dhobi Devi is homicidal as proved by PW-1 Dr. V. P. Sood. (xi) That the injuries were ante-mortem and were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. (xii) The doctor further clarified that the suffocation could be caused by blocking the nose and mouth with the help of hand or otherwise by placing quilts and clothes etc upon Madhu deceased. 12. From the above, the trial Court concluded the involvement of the accused in the commission of the double murder, attempt to murder Pawan Kumar (PW-4) and removal of jewellery beyond all reasonable doubts and consequently, convicted the accused as indicated above Further the trial Court imposed punishment of death under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code subject to its confirmation by this Court and further sentenced the accused under section 30? of the Indian Penal Code to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000. In default, the accused has been ordered to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years. In relation to the commission of the offence under section 382, IPC, the accused stood sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of five years and a fine of Rs. 3,000. In default, the accused has been ordered to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years. In relation to the commission of the offence under section 382, IPC, the accused stood sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of five years and a fine of Rs. 1,500 and in default of payment of fine, he was further ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years, 13. We have heard Shrl M S. Gulerla, learned Deputy Advocate General and Shri T. R. Chandel, learned Counsel for the accused- appellant, at length. We have also carefully examined the entire evidence, The trial Court has concluded that death of Smt. Dhobi Devi and Miss Madhu was of homicidal nature. In the instant case the learned Counsel for the accused has not challenged the findings of the trial Court vis-a-vis the death of Smt. Dhobi Devi and Miss Madhu. We have also satisfied ourselves that murder of Smt. Dhobi Devi aforesaid has been committed in the instant case. The only question that falls for our consideration is whether or not the accused-appellant has participated in the crime ? 14. After going through the material evidence against the appellant, consisting of testimony of PWs 1, 2, 4 to 8, 19 and 20, we do find that there is some amount of consistency in their evidence which could have been based for the conviction of the accused. However^ mere congruiity or consistency is not the sole test of truth. The force of the evidence does not depend merely on the credit attached to the factum probandam’ but to the result by which process of reasoning, it indirectly establishes in the mind of the Judge Of course, if direct evidence is credible, it is superior to any other class and more satisfactory to the judicial mind, However9 it must be borne in mind how easy it is to fabricate direct evidence For exam’ ple, how simple a matter it is for a witness to swear falsely ; "I saw "A" dealing the fatal blow". It is also stated that circumstances cannot He. It is also equally fallacious as appears from every days experience’ Circum stances do lie most cruelly. The innocent often succumbs to the unfounded suspicions from circumstances which appears to tell strongly against him the true bearing which the accused has neither the opportunity nor often means to explain. It is also stated that circumstances cannot He. It is also equally fallacious as appears from every days experience’ Circum stances do lie most cruelly. The innocent often succumbs to the unfounded suspicions from circumstances which appears to tell strongly against him the true bearing which the accused has neither the opportunity nor often means to explain. The truth is that either kind of the evidence whether direct or circumstantial, has Us peculiar advantages and defects. Sometimes even falsehood is given an adroit appearance of truth, so that truth disappears and falsehood comes on the surface The instant case appears to be one of those cases. There are many inherent improbabilities in the prosecution case so far as the participation of the appellant is concerned. 15. The entire case hinges upon the direct and circumstantial evidence. The central evidence consists of PWs 4, 5, 6, 7f 8, 19 and 20 besides the medical evidence consisting of PWs 1 and 2. The motive alleged by the prosecution is theft. Further the incident is stated to have been witnessed by Pawan Kumar (PW-4) an injured person. It is needless to say that when there is acceptable evidence of the eye witnesses to the commission of an offence the question of motive cannot loom large However, the Courts cannot lose sight of the fact that when motive forms an integral part of the prosecution case and circumstances depleted by the factual position existing at the spot through the documentary evidence does not corroborate the testimony of the eye witnesses, then the prosecution story becomes doubtful and hence unacceptable. In the instant case, no doubt, PW-4 Pawan Kumar an injured person, should, ordinarily, be the most competent and reliable witness but the question is as to whether he falls in that category. We answer it in the negative. 16. The trial Court has based the conviction of the accused on the testimony of this sole witness and in order to come to this conclusion, it has sought corroboration from the deposition of PWs 5 to 8, 19 and 20. The discussion of the facts shows that the offence was committed in a room adjoining the kitchen which was visible from out side the compound. The discussion of the facts shows that the offence was committed in a room adjoining the kitchen which was visible from out side the compound. Further the prosecution case, as per Pawan Kumar (PW-4), the sole eye witness, is that he was sleeping with the accused whereas Miss Madhu was sleeping with Smt Dhobi Devi; that accused firstly visited the house on 10-2-1992 and subsequently in the late night of 11-2-1992, took his meals 4kheer9 and thereafter all of them slept in the one room in the manner indicated above. During night the accused gagged the mouth of PW-4 when lights were on. He gave danda blows to Smt. Dhobi Devi, since deceased. Immediately, PW-4 heard that his maternal grand-mother was giving calls to him to free the dog which was tethered. He took oat the muffler from his mouth and ran towards the stairs but hardly he had covered 2 to 3 stairs when the accused noticed him and caught hold of him from the neck and caused injuries on his head with the help of a hollow iron-pipe. Thereafter he (accused) caught hold of him from his neck and put the sane on the threshold and gave a ‘darati’ blow causing injuries on his neck. Later the accused put the bundle of quilts on the deceased Dhobi Devi and her grand daughter Miss Madhu who was sleeping with her. After committing the murder he inserted sansi into the rectum of Smt. Dhobi Devi. He then searched the boxes and took away the entire jewellery of the deceased Smt. Dhobi Devi and her daughter-in-law Kanta Devi (PW-8) and silently fled away from the scene of crime. Later, the accused was arrested on 13-2-1992 at 8.00 a. m and his wearing apparels stained with human blood were taken into possession by the police in the presence of Udho Ram (PW-7) and Neeru Ram (not examined). The further factum of the accused having made disclosure statement) (Ex PW-7/D) with respect to the commission of theft of jewellery in the house of the deceased and consequent recovery thereof at his behest cemented the prosecution version as to the commission of the offence by the accused. In other words, the entire episode is confined to have happened in the main room wherein both the deceased and the injured person as also the accused were sleeping on the fateful night. In other words, the entire episode is confined to have happened in the main room wherein both the deceased and the injured person as also the accused were sleeping on the fateful night. It is true that the prosecution witnesses have not been cross-examined on various material points which fact also gives strength to the submissions made by the learned Deputy Advocate General that the accused Prem Chand and none-else is the author of the crime in question bat the close scrutiny of the documentary evidence read with other circumstances emerging there from makes out entirely a new case than the one put up by the prosecution. In other words, had the documentary evidence relied upon, produced and exhibited by the prosecution in the instant case, supported the facts detailed by the prosecution witnesses in their oral testimony before the Court, there was no occasion for us to differ from the conclusion so arrived at by the trial Court. In the light of above facts, we now proceed to deal with the case. 17. Viewing the site-plan Ex. PW20/A carefully, we find that the building in which this occurrence took place, is a double storeyed building. Each storey had three rooms as is apparent from the marginal note ‘O’. It also depicts that there were four beds where both the deceased and the injured were sleeping in beds lying at place shown by marks A, B and C whereas another bed was spread in a closed verandah—room adjoining to the stair-case and the bed room of the deceased as also the injured. As per PW 4, Pawan Kumar, be was sleeping with the accused and Miss Madhu with her grand-mother Smt Dhobi Devi. Had it been so, there would have been only two beds and not four as has been depicted in this site-plan. Thus this document duly proved by PW-20 on this aspect of the case, makes the testimony of Pawan Kumar (P W-4) highly doubtful. 18. Now adverting to the weapon of offence, we find that masala ghotne ka danda’ (P-10) measuring 19-7" in length with its circumference to the extent of 7-1/2" as shown in Its map Ex PW-7/Hwas found by the police at place marked-G in Ex. 18. Now adverting to the weapon of offence, we find that masala ghotne ka danda’ (P-10) measuring 19-7" in length with its circumference to the extent of 7-1/2" as shown in Its map Ex PW-7/Hwas found by the police at place marked-G in Ex. PW-20/A. Similarly, the quilts stated to be lying over and above the two deceased females were found at p)acc-F\ It Is pertinent to note that from the room of the deceased a door opens to the closed verandah where fourth bed was found spread. Obviously, it can be said to have been occupied only by the accused if the prosecution version is believed. However, this fact is not stated by PW-4. At the same time, hollow iron pipe (Ex. P-11) stained with blood had been found at place shown at T near the hearth m the kitchen which is also separate from the room where both Smt. Dhobi Devi and Miss Madhu were done to death. The knife (Ex. P-12) was found by the pro secution at the BANNI of the stair shown at "E" in this site-plan. 19. PW-4 Pawan Kumar states that lights were on, the accused gagged his mouth and then gave danda (Ex. P-10) blows to his maternal grand-mother. He also states that after some time he heard the latter giving calls to him to free the dog whereupon he took out muffler from his mouth when he had a blood vomiting and he ran towards the stairs. Hardly he had covered 2 to 3 stairs when the accused noticed him and caught hold of him from his neck, gave blows with hollow iron-pipe (P-11) on his head. Then the accused put his neck on the threshold of the door and inflicted injuries by giving a ‘darati-P-13 blow. The site- plan Ex. PW-20/A shows that weapons of offence were lying at the different places and in different rooms. Had the accused given blows to his mother-in-law with masala ghotne ka danda’ (P-10) referred to above, why he should have picked up hollow iron-pipe from kitchen, to have given beatings to his nephew. The site- plan Ex. PW-20/A shows that weapons of offence were lying at the different places and in different rooms. Had the accused given blows to his mother-in-law with masala ghotne ka danda’ (P-10) referred to above, why he should have picked up hollow iron-pipe from kitchen, to have given beatings to his nephew. It is also not understandable that in the absence of any inimical relations in between the two brothers, namely, the accused as also Bhinda Ram, why the accused should have intended to kill his nephew by inflicting darat’ blow on his neck after putting the same on the threshold of the door. The Infliction of the injuries with hollow iron-pipe have been confined by PW-4 Pawan Kumar only to himself and not to Smt. Dhobi Devi, as per his statement. The kitchen and stair case are on the two opposite side of the main room. The narration of facts by PW-4 shows that injury by hollow iron-pipe was given to him within a few seconds, may be ten or twenty seconds. In these circum stances, how could it be possible for the accused to pick up the pipe (Ex. P-11) from kitchen and use it as a weapon of offence. The above said sequence of facts narrated by PW-4 in his testimony, as such, appear (o be unnatural particularly when he says that after the injuries sustained by him be became unconscious and regained consciousness In the hospital at Palampur The statement of PW-2 Di% Chain Singh shows that Pawan Kumar (PW-4) was examined at I 00 p. m. that is the time of bis arrival in the hospital a long with Jagdish Chand UC No. 59 of police station, Baijnath. Admittedly, the police had arrived at the scene of occurrence at 12 05 p. m. Now on the site plan Ex:. PW-20/A marginal note at-A shows that Pawan Kumar (PW-4) was found sitting in his bed in an injured condition In other words, had this witness become unconscious, he could not have been found in the posture at that time by the police. This also throws a doubt on the testimony of PW-4. Further perusal of statement of PW-4 shows that the accused is his chacha’. Prem Chand (PW-5) is the son of Gadola Ram. He is also nephew of Majnu Ram as is apparent from the post-mortem report Ex. This also throws a doubt on the testimony of PW-4. Further perusal of statement of PW-4 shows that the accused is his chacha’. Prem Chand (PW-5) is the son of Gadola Ram. He is also nephew of Majnu Ram as is apparent from the post-mortem report Ex. PW-l/A He had identified the dead body and in the column it has been pointed out that he is the nephew of Majnu Ram, the husband of Sent Dhobi Devi. Admittedly, PW-4 was residing with Smt Dhobi Devi since long whereas accused Prem Chand was in a private service at Amritsar at the material time and he had come to his home only a week earlier to the date of occurrence. If that be so then PW-5 Prem Chand is also Chachu of Pawan Kumar (PW-4). Admittedly, as per the testimony of Prem Chand (PW-5) he bad gone inside the room, removed his quilts and in that process found on® knife (P-12). He admits having picked up the knife and kept it by the side of the stair at banni at point E shown in Ex. PW-20/A, The site-plan further shows that dog was tethered underneath the stairs i- e. in the ground floor and there is no iota of evidence on record to show that dog ever barked at any time during the night though it was found tethered even by the police on the following day. It means that PW-5 was familiar with the dog and when he went up-stairs to the place of occurrence, the dog did not bark. Why and for what reason this witness had picked up the knife and placed it at banni No explanation has come forth. The sequence of facts narrated by PW-4 Pawan Kumar shows that the entire incident must have occurred within 3 to 5 minutes. Why and for what reason this witness had picked up the knife and placed it at banni No explanation has come forth. The sequence of facts narrated by PW-4 Pawan Kumar shows that the entire incident must have occurred within 3 to 5 minutes. Also PW-4 Pawan Kumar must have been taken aback when his mouth was gagged and he could not have been able to see the face of the assailant at that material time in the manner in which he was stated to have been over powered and given infliction of blows not only with hollow iron-pipe but also with ‘darati’ If all the above said facts, as are depicted by the site-plan of the occurrence produced and proved by the prosecution, are taken into account, it nowhere tally with the version put forth by PW-4 nor it in any way corroborate his testimony. No other corroboration is forth coming from any other prosecution witness. PW-4 is a child witness and keeping in view the nature of his evidence, it can be reasonably concluded that his evidence is tainted by embellishments and exaggerations and the responsibility therefor rests solely with the police who had not directed their investigation in proper manner. The version of the accused that he did not visit the house of the victims appears probable not only for the above said reasons but for others which we shall discuss henceforth. In that view of the matter, the testimony of the sole eye-witness Pawan Kumar (PW-4) becomes thoroughly unacceptable version. 20. Now concentrating on the other circumstance taken into consideration by the trial Court with respect to Smt. Geeta Devi (PW-6) having seen the accused sitting nearby the hearth on 10-2-1992, we find that on her query she was apprised of his (accused) relationship with Smt. Dbobi Devi by the latter. Again relying upon the site-plan Ex. PW-20/A, it is important to note that occurrence had taken place in the main room. There is no window or even door towards the compound shown in this document. Further the occurrence had taken place in a closed room. Again relying upon the site-plan Ex. PW-20/A, it is important to note that occurrence had taken place in the main room. There is no window or even door towards the compound shown in this document. Further the occurrence had taken place in a closed room. Geeta Devi (PW-6) in her oral testimony has stated that she did not enter into the house because of the fear of the dog which was tethered inside and she on seeing the accused sitting by the side of the hearth, has asked late Smt. Dhobi Devi as to who he was. At the first instance, this hearth is in the kitchen which is located on the western-southern corner of the main house. It is not at all visible from the compound unless and until one enters the kitchen itself. Therefore, this statement of Geeta Devi (PW-6) is contrary to the record and is rendered doubtful and thus wholly unacceptable. 21. Now adverting to the third most important but corroborating circumstance according to the prosecution is that wearing apparels were taken into possession by the police during the investigation in the presence of Udho Ram (FW-7) and Nreru Ram (not examined) which bore human blood stains of O* blood group. The reports of the Forensic Science Laboratory Exs, PX and PY also show that blood group of Smt. Dhobi Devi was 0, In other words the human blood found on shirt Ex. P-35, jersey P-36 and pattu P-37 which were taken into possession by the police, tallied with the blood group of Smt. Dhobi Devi This factum of recovery of these wearing apparels is sought to be corroborated by the testimony of Udho Ram (PW-7) and Jodha Mai, A. S. I., Investigating Officer (PW-19). The most important question which arises is whether the testimony with respect to the recovery of the wearing apparels having human blood stains of blood group O is credible. We have carefully examined the record and despite the above said oral evidence, we have no hesitation in concluding that the testimony of above said witnesses cannot also be relied upon. 22. The prosecution case is that accused was arrested on 13-2-1992 at 8.00 a. m. at his house after making frantic search to arrest him on the previous day by raiding the house of his sister at Majharena. 22. The prosecution case is that accused was arrested on 13-2-1992 at 8.00 a. m. at his house after making frantic search to arrest him on the previous day by raiding the house of his sister at Majharena. Admittedly, the wearing apparels were taken into possession, as per PW-7 Udho Ram, in the police station in his presence and that of Neeru Ram, referred to above, PW-19, Jodha Mai, A. S. L, Investigating Officer says that at the time of arrest of the accused he had noticed blood stains on his wearing apparels, namely, shirt P-35, jersey P-36 and pattu P-37 and that he had brought him to the police station ; that at the time of his arrest, the brother of the accused, Bhinda Ram, was also present and he had accompanied the accused upto the police station. He further categorically states that said Bhinda Ram had not at all been associated in the investigation. Now if we see the personal search Memo (Ex. PW-19/ A) as also recovery Memo, of the wearing apparels (Ex. PW 7/C) we find different set of witnesses. In the personal search Memo, the witnesses are Bhinda Ram and Prem Chand whereas in the Memo of recovery of the wearing apparels, Udho Ram (PW-7) and Neeru Ram have been cited as witnesses It means that the search had been conducted by A. S. I. Jodha Mai at two different occasions. PW-19 admits that the accused was arrested in the presence of his brother Bhinda Ram. Taking this statement into account, it means that personal search of the accused was con ducted at the time of his arrest at his (accused) house. Had A. S. I. Jodha Mai (PW-19) noticed wearing apparels stained with blood, he was under legal duty and pursuant to that he would have positively taken into possession the wearing apparels Ei. P-35 to Ex. P-37 by conducting not only the personal search of the accused but also preparing the recovery Memo. That has not been done. Why ? The reasons are best known to the investigating agency. P-35 to Ex. P-37 by conducting not only the personal search of the accused but also preparing the recovery Memo. That has not been done. Why ? The reasons are best known to the investigating agency. However, legally the inference which can only be drawn from this circumstance is that PW-19 Jodha Mai A. S. I. did not observe any blood stains on the wearing apparels of the accused and that was the reason why the said clothes were not taken into possession at the time of his arrest on 13-2*1992 at 8 a. m. 23. Another reason which cements our above conclusion is that accused was admittedly brought in a private vehicle. It is also in the affidavit of Ashwani Kumar C. No 37> that dead bodies of Sent Dhobi Devi and Miss Madhu were brought by him to the District Hospital, Palampur, on 13-2-1992. As per PW-1, Dr. V. P. Sood, the post-mortem was conducted at 3 p. m. on 13-2-1992. The accused was brought to the police station Baijnath which is about 15 Kms ahead of Palampur at 2 p. m. as per PWs 7, 19 and 20. The case diary pertaining to 12-2-1992 (after 11 p. m.) shows that the dead bodies were entrusted to PW Ashwani Kumar and Rosban Lal constables for being taken to the Civil Hospital Palampur for post-mortem purpose. It further shows that the said dead bodies were brought in a private tempo bearing registration No. HPK 1823 driven by one Joginder Singh. The timings of the arrival of the accused and that of the bringing of the dead bodies and further that the accused was also brought in a private vehicle, synchronise,. In the absence of the police not having taken the wearing apparels of the accused into possession at the time of his arrest and consequent personal search thereto coupled with the factum of the accused as also the dead bodies having been brought in a private vehicle and having reached the police station Baijnath at a belated hour shows hanky-panky in between. The place of occurrence is only 11 kms from the Police Station Baijnath whereas village Killi is 10 kms ahead of village Sakri where the occurrence had taken place in the house of Smt. Dhobi Devi. In other words the distance of 21 Kms. has been covered by PW-19 in a private vehicle within six hours. The place of occurrence is only 11 kms from the Police Station Baijnath whereas village Killi is 10 kms ahead of village Sakri where the occurrence had taken place in the house of Smt. Dhobi Devi. In other words the distance of 21 Kms. has been covered by PW-19 in a private vehicle within six hours. No doubt PW-19 has volunteered that on the way the private vehicle had become defective. 24. There is no cross-examination by the learned Counsel for the defence on any aspect of this case yet the facts disclosed by the evidence of the above said PWs i e. PWs No. 7, 19 and 20 do not satisfy our conscience to conclude that the wearing apparels were found stained with blood at the time of arrest of the accused at his house It is to be noted that Bhinda Ram aforesaid, father of PW-4 Pawan Kumar, has not been examined as a witness. Had he been so examined, he would have thrown light on this aspect of the case. In the absence of all these facts we are constrained to hold that the plea of the prosecution case with respect to taking blood stained wearing apparels of the accused bearing blood stains of group O’ of Smt Dhobi Devi is tenable. Rather in view of the above, the entire prosecution case becomes wholly doubtful and consequently un-acceptable. The learned trial Court has failed to consider all the above said facts emerging from the documentary evidence relied upon by the prosecution. This fact also negatives the culpability of the accused. 25. The next circumstance is whether the alleged motive-theft is the integral part of the prosecution version, if so, how and in what manner this part of the prosecution story creates a link between the accused and the crime in question. 26. The normal rule is that if the evidence is adduced on behalf of the prosecution, oral or circumstantial, then whether there was immediate motive for committing the offence, loses all significance. Normally there is a motive behind every criminal act and that is why the investigating agency as well as the Court while examining the complicity of an accused, first try to ascertain as to what was the driving force which compelled the accused to commit the crime in question. Normally there is a motive behind every criminal act and that is why the investigating agency as well as the Court while examining the complicity of an accused, first try to ascertain as to what was the driving force which compelled the accused to commit the crime in question. But with complex growth of society and which has also produced complex characters, the actions and reactions of persons either on the accused side or on the prosecution side, are not very easy to ascertain and judge, It is a common experience that even a small or trifle incident has different reaction on different persons. That is why it is not always easy for the Court to weigh and judge as to whether under the circumstances brought on record by the prosecution, in normal course the accused concerned could have acted at alleged by the prosecution. 27. In this regard reference may be had to the cases of Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1956 S3 460 ; Narayan Nathu Naik v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 197 i SC 1656 ; Podda Narayana v State of A, P.. AIR 1975 SC 1252 ; Mola v. State of Haryana, AIR 1976 SG 2499 ; Faquira v. State of U. P., AIR 1976 SC 915 and Jarnall Singh and another v. State of Haryana, XT 1993 (I) SC 207. 28. Thus, in case such evidence is available, it affords a corroborating circumstance to the other direct or indirect evidence establishing the charge against the accused and his complicity in the commission of the offence. 29. According to prosecution witnesses Pawan Kumar (PW-4), Smt. Ajudhia (not produced), Prem Chand (PW-5) and Udho Ram (PW 7), they had entered the room where the occurrence had taken place and found various articles scattered and a trunk/box lying unlocked. According to them, these circumstances pointed out the commission of the theft of certain valuable articles. In other words, their statements are confined to the commission of the theft as also murder and attempt to commit murder in one room only where dead bodies were lying. However, if we closely peruse naksha mauka najri of the place of occurrence, it reveals that theft had occurred in room indicated by R located in the ground floor as pointed out in marginal note No, 18 of Ex. PW-20/A and not in the main room referred to above. However, if we closely peruse naksha mauka najri of the place of occurrence, it reveals that theft had occurred in room indicated by R located in the ground floor as pointed out in marginal note No, 18 of Ex. PW-20/A and not in the main room referred to above. This fact has not been clarified by either of the above said witnesses. Secondly, the factum of theft does not find mention either in the F. I. R Ex PW-5/A or in the inquest reports Ex. PW-20/C and PW-20/B. Thirdly, as per PW-7 Udho Ram, Majnu Ram, the husband of Smt. Diiobi Devi (deceased) and his son Krishan were asked to search the trunks/boxes etc in order to know whether there was burglary. This witness does not name Smt, Kanta Devi (PW-8) having been asked by the investigating Officer to search and find out the factucn of theft having been committed, if any. On the contrary, Sent. Kanta Devi (PW 8) refers to herself aioae having been directed by the police to see the trunks/ boxes lying there and apprise the police whether burglary had been committed. Notably, both Shri Udho Ram (PW-7) and Sent. Kanta Devi (PW-8) were present at the scene of occurrence throughout after the arrival of the police at 32 05 p m. (noon) on 12-2-1992. Both had identified and witnessed the recovery of the dead bodies at the scene of occurrence as is apparent from the ir quest reports Ex PW-20/B and PW-20/C. PW-20 also refers to the direction having been given to Scot Kanta Devi (PW-8) to search the boxes etc. to find out whether theft had or had not been committed and his statement is in consonance with the case diary but the same (case diary) does not indicate whether such instructions were or were not given to Majnu Ram or his son Krishan Inquest report was obviously made after lodging of the F. I. R. by Prem Chand (PW-5). Circumstances indicating commission of theft in the form of scattering of new clothes etc. were existing at the scene of occurrence. Why these facts were not indicated in the inquest report despite the fact that it formed integral part of the prosecution case and reflected the motive of the assailant in the commission of the crime in question, is welt known to them. were existing at the scene of occurrence. Why these facts were not indicated in the inquest report despite the fact that it formed integral part of the prosecution case and reflected the motive of the assailant in the commission of the crime in question, is welt known to them. Fourthly, none of the photographs (positives) indicate any such fact as is now being put forth before the Court. 30. At this stage, it would be pertinent to detail that as observed in the case of Podda Narayana and others (supra), the proceedings under section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code have a very limited scope. The object of the proceedings is merely to ascertain whether a person has died under suspicious circumstances or an unnatural death, and if so, what is the apparent cause of the death. The question regarding the details as to how the deceased was assaulted or who assaulted him or under what circumstances, he was assaulted, is foreign to the ambit and scope of the proceedings under this Section. Neither in practice nor in law it is necessary for the police to mention those details in the inquest report. 31. In the instant case commission of theft was the integral part of the prosecution version keeping in view the background of the accused that he was employed in Amritsar in a private firm ; that he had come a week earlier only to his village Killi and he had visited village Sakri in the house of the deceased only on 10th and 11th February, 1992. Also he had no inimical relations with that family earlier to the incident where his nephew Pa wan Kumar (PW-4) was residing since long. In these circum stances the factum of not pointing of the commission of theft in the inquest report becomes an important omission. The prosecution has not been able to give any reasonable explanation as to why this was not detailed in the inquest report. In these circum stances the factum of not pointing of the commission of theft in the inquest report becomes an important omission. The prosecution has not been able to give any reasonable explanation as to why this was not detailed in the inquest report. No doubt, no suggestion to the contrary has been put to him on this aspect of this case, yet in view of the case emerging from the testimony of PWs 4, 5, 7, 8, 19 and 20 the scene of occurrence with respect to commission of murder as also that of burglary is confined to the main room where dead bodies were lying which circumstance is contradicted by the site-plan of the place of occurrence {Ex PW-20/A) as discussed above. True, that there is no column for mentioning the apparent cause of incident, yet this fact being the integral part, was bound to appear in column 24 relating to the summary of the occurrence. This fact too demolishes the entire edifice and fabric of the prosecution case in addition to the circumstances discussed earlier. 32. Another circumstance against the accused is that various weapons of offence, namely, knife (Ex. P-12), hollow iron-pipe (P-11) etc. have been used to inflict injuries upon Pawan Kumar (PW-4), According to PW-2 Dr. Chain Singh, injury No. 3 has been caused by a sharp edged weapon, However, PW-4 says that the injury No 3 was caused by hollow Iron-pipe (Ex. P-ll) with the use of force on his person In other words oral evidence is contrary to the medical evidence On the basis of oral evidence of PW-4, learned Deputy Advocate General wanted us to believe that such like injuries could also take the shape of incised wound irrespective of the fact that it has been caused by the use of a blunt weapon like hollow iron-pipe. He has drawn support from Commentaries in Modis Text Book (Medical Jurisprudence) 17th Edition (t%) at page 275). He has drawn support from Commentaries in Modis Text Book (Medical Jurisprudence) 17th Edition (t%) at page 275). However, we find that Dr Chain Singh (PW 2) has not been non-fronted with any Text Book or Medical Jurisprudence by Modi to substantiate the fact that injury No 3 on the person of Paw*n Kumar (PW-4) has been caused by a blunt weapon PW-2 has specifically stated that on examination of injury No 3-incised wound, he found that margins were regular and well defined and covered with blood clots In the absence of PW-2 having been confronted with the aforesaid commentary to establish that injury No. 3 was or could be caused by the use of blunt weapon, we ere unable to accept this submission Also, taking into consideration the length and circumference of the hollow iron-pipe (P-U) allegedly used with force by the assailant, it could not have caused such an injury having regular and well defined margins covered with blood clots Also, the existence of the above said weapons at various places and in different rooms indicated in site-plan of the occurrence (naksha mauka najri) (Ex, PW-20/A) coupled with the sequence of events stated by the sole eye witness Pawan Kumar (PW 4) with respect to the manner in which occurrence had taken place vis-a-vis him and Smt Dhobi Devi (deceased), we are unable to hold that the occurrence was the consequence of the use of various weapons by one man—the accused alone. There appears to be more than one persons in the commission of the offence. We find that grain cannot be separated from chaff because the grain and chaff are so inextricably mixed up that in the process of separation, we will have to reconstruct an absolutely new case for the prosecution by divorcing the essential details presented by the prosecution completely from the context and the background against which they are made in view of the oral evidence of Pawan Kumar (PW 4} the sole eye-witness, read with PWs 3, 7, 8, 19 and 20 on the one hand and the documentary evidence exhibited by inquest report and "naksha mauka najri" of the place of occurrence (Ex. PW-20/A), on the other. 33. PW-20/A), on the other. 33. The next material circumstance, at the cost of repetition, is the recovery of various weapons of offence pointed out the use of a masala ghotne ka danda, iron-pipe ordinarily used by the villagers for burning fire, knife, sickle and a ‘sansi’ Apart from it, the circumstances found at the scene of occurrence indicate that the theft of valuable articles like jewellery was the underlying motive of the assailant to commit the crime. , While doing so, the prosecution evidence shows that the assailant had also handled the trunks for committing theft of jewellery. All these weapons of offence had been taken into possession by the police and got them exhibited in the Court. No doubt, an effort has been made to establish the blood group existing on these weapons by seeking the report of the Assistant Director, Forensic Science Laboratory, yet the prosecution never made an effort to collect the finger prints for the purpose of establishing the identity of the assailant when the investigating agency seized the above weapons of offence. On proof of the existence of linger prints, the guilt of the accused would have been proved to the hilt. On the oilier band, failure or neglect to prove this element by prosecution, creates a big void and thus it is hardly possible to draw a conclusion of guilt against the appellant. The default of the prosecution can be said to be intentional and it must be held that the prosecution has kept back or withheld the vital evidence. It is a vital omission on the part of the prosecution from which a reasonable conclusion can be drawn that in case the finger prints found on any weapon of offence referred to above were sent to an expert, the result would have been in favour of the accused-appellant In fact the prosecution was under a legal obligation to establish the use thereof by the appellant and none else. This fact also negative the culpability of the accused. 34. Also the nature of the injuries caused by ‘sansi’ into the rectum of Smt. Dbobi Devi deceased has been deposed by PW-1 Dr. V. P. Sood, as post mortem injury. Why the accused should have indulged himself in such a nasty act when his motive was theft as set up by the prosecution ? 34. Also the nature of the injuries caused by ‘sansi’ into the rectum of Smt. Dbobi Devi deceased has been deposed by PW-1 Dr. V. P. Sood, as post mortem injury. Why the accused should have indulged himself in such a nasty act when his motive was theft as set up by the prosecution ? This fact also raises a doubt as to the complicity of the accused. 35. Admittedly, the appellant is the younger brother of Bhinda Ram alias Ram Lai (not produced), The narration of the facts with respect to the residence of wife Leelo Devi and son Pawan Kumar (PW-4) with Smt. Dbobi Devi deceased at village Sakri since sufficiently long time instead of residing with Bhinda Ram at village Killi located at a distance of 8 kms. from village Sakri, indicate that said Bhinda Ram on one hand, and his wife and son, on the other, were having strained relations with each other This fact is corroborated by the testimony of Geeta Devi (PW4) when she states that Smt. Dhobi Devi, now deceased, tried to reconcile the matter between Bhinda and his wife and further that the former also tried to purchase the land but the latter did not agree to live in her (Dhobi Devis) village. It further goes to show that the relations in between Bhinda Rom and deceased Smt. Dhobi Devi were not good. In other words, said Bhinda Ram alias Ram Lai was not on good terms with late Smt. Dhobi Devi. There is no evidence on record to the contrary. If that be so, why the appellant should have continued his visits to the house of the deceased. It would be pertinent to detail here that none of the pro secution witness nor any one of the co-villagers had seen the appellant in village Sakri at the house of the deceased Dhobi Devi on 11-2-1992. Even Smt Geeta Devi (PW-6) refers to the accused having seen him for the first time and that too, for a very short time as she admits in the cross- examination that she never saw the accused earlier to that date nor she ever had any talk with him at that moment when he was sitting by the side of the hearth. Apart from it, her version regarding the ideality of the accused depends upon the information imparted to her by late Smt. Dhobi Devi, She does not talk about the wearing apparels of the accused nor the prosecution has held any identification parade wherein PW-6 could have the chance to identify the person (Prem Chand accused). It is to be noted that as per her admission in cross-examination to the effect that she could not go inside the house because of the fear from the dog tethered there, her statement that she saw the accused sitting nearby the hearth on 10-2-1992 and that she enquired about his whereabouts from late Smt. Dhobi Devi, has to be accepted with a pinch of salt particularly, when she states that if the dog used to be tethered then it used not allow any body to enter inside the room Rather PW-6 Smt, Geeta Devi has already been disbelieved. As such she cannot be depended upon to hold that accused-appellant had visited the house of Smt. Dhobi Devi on l0-2-1992. Except the evidence of Smt. Geeta Devi (PW-6) there is no iota of evidence on record to prove the visit of the appellant to the house of Smt, Dhobi Devi either on 10 or ! 1-2-1992. Thus the stand taken by the accused appears to be true and correct that he never visited the house of late Smt. Dbobi Devi for the last 3-1/2 years. 36. Our conclusion is fortified if we look to the facts of the case from another angle. According to Pawan Kumar (PW-4). the accused had given a call to tether the dog on arriving at the house of Dhobi Devi during the night of 11-2-1992 On being asked to disclose his identity, he had also replied that he is the same person who had come yesterday night in the house. Why the accused did not disclose his name or relationship when he was allegedly a frequent visitor to the house of late Smt. Dhobi Devi and, particularly, when he bad visited the house on 10-2-1992, is not understandable. Why the accused did not disclose his name or relationship when he was allegedly a frequent visitor to the house of late Smt. Dhobi Devi and, particularly, when he bad visited the house on 10-2-1992, is not understandable. We have already observed that accused had come on leave from Amritsar for a period of seven days and during that time this visit is alleged by the prosecution There is no evidence showing his visits to the house except on 10-2-1992 and 11-2-1992 This means that he was not a frequent visitor nor he was familiar with the dog of the deceased Dhobi Devi. In normal course the dog would have positively barked on seeing the accused It is not the case so set up by the prosecution. It means that some other person other than the accused who was not only a frequent visitor to the deceased family but was also familiar with the dogs had come to the house, i. e., why the dog did not bark. This conclusion is further corroborated by the fact that the dog also did not bark when the real culprit left the scene of occurrence after committing the crime. The dog was tethered at a place just underneath the stairs leading to the first floor Had the culprit been the accused, the dog would have positively indicated his presence by barking The absence of evidence as to the behaviour of the dog also raises a doubt as to the complicity of the accused in the commission of the offence in question. 37. Now the next question is whether the accused had made a disclosure statement, if so to what effect ? The case of the prosecution is that on interrogation in the police station, the accused had made a disclosure statement Ex. PW-7/D to the effect that he had kept concealed the stolen jewellery from the house of Dhobi Devi in his house and he can get the same recovered S/Shri Udho Ram (PW-7) and Neero Ram were pre sent at that time. On the other hand the case of the accused as disclosed In his statement under section 313 Cr. P, C. is that the police had got his signatures on the blank papers. Therefore, the question arises whether the version of the prosecution is true or not. 38. On the other hand the case of the accused as disclosed In his statement under section 313 Cr. P, C. is that the police had got his signatures on the blank papers. Therefore, the question arises whether the version of the prosecution is true or not. 38. When we closely examine the entire record, we find various circumstances negativing the prosecution version in this behalf as well, As pointed out above, Pawan Kumar (PW-4) had named the accused as chachu to be the author of the crime to the police in his statement record ed in the hospital on 12-2-1992. PW Jodha Mai, one of the Investigating Officer, had specifically been given the duty of arresting the accused, He had formally arrested the accused at his house in the morning of 13-2-1992 at about 8 a, m. This witness had also observed blood stains on his wearing apparels. The Investigating Officer was accompanied by two constables Possessing positive information regarding the involvement of the accused in the commission of the offence in question, this witness was bound to effect not only personal search of the accused but also that of the house for the recovery of certain weapon of offence as also with regard to the recovery of the stolen property. This has not been done by him. Also the perusal of disclosure statement Ex PW-7/D shows that there is sufficient gap in between the contents of the documents and the space where the signatures of the accused exists We have already indicated that the material evidence—blood stained wearing apparels of the accused were not taken into possession though recovery Memo, of the personal search of the accused recovering an amount of Rs 202-90 alongwith one ring of gold was prepared. Also Bhinda, whose son had been attempted to be murdered by the accused, had not been associated as a witness to any recovery or other documents prepared in the form of disclosure statement etc. prepared by the police. Admittedly, as per PW-19 the accused was interrogated for about an hour in the police station and he had made a disclosure statement voluntarily If we believe this version that the accused was wearing blood stained clothes and he made this disclosure voluntarily, he would not have taken such a long time of one hour even for disclosing these facts. Admittedly, as per PW-19 the accused was interrogated for about an hour in the police station and he had made a disclosure statement voluntarily If we believe this version that the accused was wearing blood stained clothes and he made this disclosure voluntarily, he would not have taken such a long time of one hour even for disclosing these facts. The cumulative effect of this fact is that it cannot be concluded that the disclosure statement had been made by the accused, or if made, it is of voluntary character. 39. From whatsoever angle we view the evidence, we find ourselves unable to hold the accused guilty of the commission of the offence in question. The prosecution has miserably failed to link the accused with the commission of the crime in question for want of cogent and convincing evidence. Accordingly, Criminal Appeal No. 196 of 92 filed by the accused, is accepted, the impugned judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, is set aside and the accused is ordered to be acquitted forthwith, if not required in any other case. 40. In view of the above, Murder Reference No. 1 of 1992 becomes infructuous and the same is answered accordingly. Appeal allowed