JUDGMENT S.M. Daud, J. - This Appeal takes exception to the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellant for the alleged commission of the offences punishable under sections 302 and 449 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The deceased Vilas Patil and the appellant are both residents of Village Tambadshct, Taluka Pan, District Raigad. Sometime prior to October, 1987, a highway robbery had taken place in or near about gaothan of Tambadshet. The police had come questioning the villagers to find out the identity of the robbers. Vilas was one of the persons questioned and he told the police of the appellant being amongst the participants in the robbery. This disclosure became known to the appellant and from that time onwards he har-boured a deep-seated grudge against Vilas. On 21.10.1987 Vilas was at home with his minor son P.W. l Satyam. His wife Suman had gone to work in a field. Nearby lived Vilas's step-brother Vijay and step-sister Sadhna. The step-brother Vijay was not at home. Sadhna is also a child; While Vilas was lying at home the appellant came with an iron bar described by the witnesses as a Shig or Pahar with this weapon the appellant struck several blows on the person of Vilas. A part of the beating was witnessed by P.W. 2 Prakash who was then engaged in the chore of transporting sheaves to some crop threshed from his agricultural land to his home in the gaothan. This home Prakash faces that of Vilas. When Prakash berated the appellant, the latter took to his heels. Sat yam before whose eyes Vilas had been beaten, went to the neighbouring house and informed Sadhna of the happening inside his home. Sadhna went to the land where Suman was working and told Suman of what had taken place. Suman came running to her home and found her husband lying on the floor. Thinking that he was alive, she tried to push water into his mouth but to no avail. Word of Vilas's violent death had come to the ears of his cousin Avinash. Avinash did not know who the assailant was Therefore, when he contacted the Police Patil of Hamrapur, he did not name the appellant. The Police Patil, P.W. 4 Anant Patil came to the Pen Police Station and gave an information which is at Ext. 14. Word of Vilas's violent death had come to the ears of his cousin Avinash. Avinash did not know who the assailant was Therefore, when he contacted the Police Patil of Hamrapur, he did not name the appellant. The Police Patil, P.W. 4 Anant Patil came to the Pen Police Station and gave an information which is at Ext. 14. In this information it was said that Vilas had been murdered by "somebody". As offence was registered and investigation began. The corpse of the dead man was sent to the Primary Health Centre at Village lite. P.W. 5 Dr. Jagdale carried out the post-mortem examination and his notes are at Ext. 22. These show that there were as many as seven external injuries on the body of Vilas and that all these injuries were ante-mortem. 3. Death was due to intracranial haemorrhage following a traumatic head injury. The witnesses were examined and on the basis of the information received from them, the appellant was apprehended. In due course, the investigation was completed and the appellant charge sheeted. The usual enquire over, the appellant found himself before the Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad at Alibag. 4. To the charge of having committed offences punishable under Sections 449 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, the appellant pleaded not guilty. His defence was that he had not assaulted Vilas and that the members of the said persons family were testifying falsely against him. To substantiate the charge levelled against the appellant, the prosecution examined Satyam; Prakash, Suman; Anant and Dr. Jagdale. Even so important a witness as Sadhna not t6 speak of Avinash and the Investigating Officer, were no-examined. The learned Additional Sessions Judge who tried the appellant, found him guilty on both the counts and imposed on him an appropriate sentence. The conviction and sentence awarded are assailed in appeal. Having heard Mr. Pane for the appellant and the Additional Public Prosecutor, we are satisfied that the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the appellant Reversing the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, we allow the appeal and acquit the appellant Our reasons for so doing are given below: 5. Satyam, who is the star witness in the case was 8 years old when he was examined in the Court Though a school going boy, the child had limitations, flowing from his tender age and poor background. Satyam, who is the star witness in the case was 8 years old when he was examined in the Court Though a school going boy, the child had limitations, flowing from his tender age and poor background. He spoke of the appellant having struck his father while the latter was asleep with a weapon alternatively described by him as a Shig and a Pahar. He speaks of P.W. 2 Prakash having witnessed the incident Certain number of contradictions have been suggested to Sat yam and it was the misfortune of the defence that the said contradictions could not be proved because of the failure of the prosecution to put the Investigating Officer into the witness box. Where the defence is so disabled, the prosecution must be precluded from taking advantage: of the situation brought about by its action. Quite apart from the above aspect, it is surprising that Sat yam, who was at least aware of his father being battered to death, not raising an alarm and yet he admits that it was only after the beating was over, that he went in search of his aunt Sadhna. The said Sadhna has not been examined and there is no explanation forthcoming for this significant omission. The appellant will be entitled to the usual inference viz. that Sadhna has been kept out because, her examination would have falsified Sat yam or because the girl Sadhna would not have supported the story given out by Sat yam. It is true that no significant reason to discredit Sat yam has been brought out in his cross-examination. But the witness is only a child and the child's mother admits that there was no love lost between the appellant and her deceased husband Vilas. Possibly the animus was transmitted to the child and that may explain the adverse testimony of Sat yam. The dangers inherent in the testimony of a child witness are well-known and to not go into, it is common that too many details, a child tutored to tell a tale and made to repeat the tale more than once, comes to believe in the veracity thereof. When the crucial moment of testifying in Court comes, the tutored child can so depose as to carry conviction with the audience about his versatility. When the crucial moment of testifying in Court comes, the tutored child can so depose as to carry conviction with the audience about his versatility. In a case of this nature it was absolutely necessary for the prosecution to examine Sadhna as also remove the legitimate doubts springing from the information conveyed to the police Patil by no lessor a person than Avinash, the cousin of ,the murdered man. Prakash speaks of trips being made by him and his neighbours between the agricultural land in which crop was being threshed or harvested and the sheaves being transported to his house in the gaothan, On the occasion of one such trip, he saw the appellant beating Vilas. When berated, the appellant quickly walked away from the place. Prakash did not go inside the house of Vilas to find out that consequence the beating had upon that unfortunate person. He did not speak of the beating to anyone like Suman or Avinash. It was only later that he learnt of Vilas having passed away. Such casualness on the part of a close neighbour of Vilas is unbelievable. Of course, Prakash is at pains to say in his examination-in-chief that he harbors no grudge against the appellant. But animus is not the only reason for people deviating from the truth. There can be reasons known and unknown, which make people tell lies. The contemporaneous and subsequent conduct of Prakash militates against the probability of his having seen the appellant beating Vilas. Suman claims that she learnt of the appellant belabouring her husband from Sadhna. But in that case she would have been the first to rush to the police station for she makes it clear that the assailant's identity was well-known to her and that the said assailant was the appellant. Police Patil Anant says that when he went to the house of Vilas that person's son was present, but in no mood to reply to the queries proposed to be put to him. The son was weeping and walling. The fact of the appellant being the assailant was well known to Satyam, Sadhna and Prakash. They must have passed on the information to the whole neighbourhood and yet none of them appear to have told the Police Patil of the appellant being the assailant. Dr. Jagdale's evidence proves that the deceased died a homicidal death. The fact of the appellant being the assailant was well known to Satyam, Sadhna and Prakash. They must have passed on the information to the whole neighbourhood and yet none of them appear to have told the Police Patil of the appellant being the assailant. Dr. Jagdale's evidence proves that the deceased died a homicidal death. But the author of that crime remains unknown. Disagreeing with the learned Additional Sessions Judge, we quash the conviction and sentence recorded against the appellant. The appeal is allowed and the appellant is acquitted of the offences punishable under sections 449 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He be set at liberty forthwith unless wanted in connection with some other crime. Fine, if paid, be refunded. Appeal allowed.