JUDGMENT S. K. Mookerji, J. 1. This Government Appeal has been filed by the State of U.P. against the judgment and order dated 13.2.1980 in Sessions Trial No. 471 of 1979 State v. Ikrar Khan, by the learned Sessions Judge Shahjahanpur, whereby the accused Iqrar Khan has been acquitted both under Sections 302 and 315, I.P.C. 2. Before going into the details of this case it will be necessary to point out that the occurrence took place on 13.6.1979 sometimes in the morning in Mohalla Maghaitola, Police Station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur. On the same day at about 12.15 p.m. the first information report was lodged by Sadaqat Husain (P.W. 5), who is the brother of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum. It will also be necessary to point out that he is not an eye witness of the occurrence. The deceased is Smt. Hajra Begum, wife of the accused Iqrar Khan. The prosecution case, in nutshell!, is that the deceased, Smt. Hajra Begum was the wife of the accused Ikrar Khan and their marriage had taken place about 7 years back. However, the relations between the spouses were strained and the accused used to beat her and on many occasions turned her out from his house. It is also stated that the accused was not given any cycle and radio etc. by her parents. A day before the present occurrence the accused had beaten Smt. Hajra Begum and turned her out of his house at about noon. She went to the house of her mother Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) and informed her about the misconduct of the accused. Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) consoled her and stated that she would accompany her to her house in the evening and would also pacify the accused. Consequently, she took Smt. Hajra Begum to the house of the accused in the same evening and waited there for the accused. The accused arrived late in the night. Thereafter Smt. Aliman tried to pacify the accused and asked him not to beat Smt. Hajra Begum any more but the accused was infuriated and dealt her with slaps in her presence. It is stated that at that time Smt. Hajara Begum deceased was carrying pregnancy of 8 months. Smt. Aliman (P.W.1), it is stated, remained there in the night. Thereafter Smt. Aliman tried to pacify the accused and asked him not to beat Smt. Hajra Begum any more but the accused was infuriated and dealt her with slaps in her presence. It is stated that at that time Smt. Hajara Begum deceased was carrying pregnancy of 8 months. Smt. Aliman (P.W.1), it is stated, remained there in the night. On the next morning before departing she again asked the accused not to beat the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum any more. However, the accused again started beating Smt. Hajra Begum with slaps. It is stated that in the meantime witnesses Bashir Husain (P.W.3), Tajammul Husain and Pirru Khan (P.W. 2) arrived there and tried to pacify the accused them to keep themselves aloof since it was his family affairs. It is stated by the prosecution that the accused gave a very heavy kick on the abdomen of Smt. Hajra Begum. She fell down on the ground on receiving the kicks and became unconscious. The prosecution further stated that Smt. Aliman (P.W.1) asked the witnesses Bashir Husain (P.W.3) and Tajammul Husain, who were residents of the Mohalla of Smt. Aliman (P.W.1) to go and inform her son Sadaqat Husain about the occurrence. After that the accused picked up Smt. Hajra Begum from the floor where she had fallen down unconscious and laid her on a cot in the verandah and after that he pressed her throat with both of his hands thereby killing her on the spot. As a result of the strangulation of the deceased, Smt. Hajra Begum, the unborn child, which Smt. Hajra Begum was carrying, also died. Thus, the prosecution case is that the accused committed the murder of Smt. Hajra Begum in the morning of 13.6.1979, who died at about 10 a.m. The witnesses Bashir Husain and Tajammul Husain went to the field of Sadaqat Hussain in Mohalla Maghaitola and informed him about the incident. Sadaqat Hussain then came to the house of the accused and found his sister Smt. Hajra Begum lying dead on a cot in the verandah and his mother was weeping there. Then his mother Smt. Aliman narrated the entire occurrence before him. Thereafter, Sadaqat Husain (P.W. 5) got his report Ext. Ka-2, scribed by Saghir Ahmad, (not produced) and went to the police station where he lodged the said first information report at about 12.15 p.m. 3. Then his mother Smt. Aliman narrated the entire occurrence before him. Thereafter, Sadaqat Husain (P.W. 5) got his report Ext. Ka-2, scribed by Saghir Ahmad, (not produced) and went to the police station where he lodged the said first information report at about 12.15 p.m. 3. The report, in brief, lodged by Sadaqat Husain is that he was resident of Bangusht, police station Kotwali District Shahjahanpur and his sister Smt. Hajra Begum was married to accused Iqrar Khan son of Chhiddu Khan, resident of Mohalla Maghaitola, police station Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur about 7 years before. Since then the accused Iqrar Khan used to beat her off and on. Accused Iqrar Khan had also driven her out from his house. Sometimes back also she was driven out from the house. This first information report further narrates that on 12.6.1979 accused Iqrar Khan had again beaten his sister Smt. Hajra Begum who had, therefore, come to his house in Mohalla Bangasht. Next day his mother Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) had taken his sister to the house of accused Iqrar Khan and told Iqrar Khan not to beat her. Iqrar Khan had beaten her pregnant sister before Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) also. On 13.6.1979 also in the morning Iqrar Khan in the presence of Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1), had beaten Smt. Hajra Begum. On hearing the cries Tajammul Husain son of Akmal Husain, Bashir Husain and Pirru Khan witnesses arrived on the spot and asked the accused not be beat her but the accused Iqrar Khan in their presence kicked on the abdomen of Smt. Hajra Begum. Thereafter her condition deteriorated and at about 10 in the morning Smt. Hajra Begum expired in the presence of Smt. Aliman. Thereafter the witnesses Bashir Husain and Tajammul Husain had gone and informed Sadaqat Husain (P.W. 5) about the incident. Thereafter, Sadaquat Husain had gone to Maghaitola and found her sister lying dead. Thereafter Sadaqat Husain got a written report prepared, proceeded to police station and lodged the same for taking action against the accused Iqrar Khan, according to law. 4. AT this stage it will be necessary to point out that although Sadaquat Husain had come to know about the occurrence from his mother Smt. Aliman, who was an eye-witness, in detail. In the above report there are certain glaring omissions. 4. AT this stage it will be necessary to point out that although Sadaquat Husain had come to know about the occurrence from his mother Smt. Aliman, who was an eye-witness, in detail. In the above report there are certain glaring omissions. One of such omission is that there is no mention about the killing of Smt. Hajra Begum by strangulating her neck or by pressing her neck by any hard substance. This aspect of the matter shall be dealt with at the later part of our judgment. On the basis of the said report a case was registered against the accused and the case was investigated by S.I. Jai Vir Singh (P.W. 8). He recorded the statement of Sadaqat Husain, complainant, at the Thana itself and then reached the place of the occurrence and found the dead body of Smt. Hajra Begum lying on a cot. He also prepared the inquest report. Ext. Ka-5 and other connected papers of the dead body, sealed the dead body and sent the same for post mortem examination. He also found broken bangles lying under the cot. He collected it and sealed them in a packet and prepared the recovery memo (Ext. Ka-8). Thereafter, he inspected the site and prepared the site-Plan, Ext. Ka-9, and then recorded the statement of Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) and Pirru Khan (P.W. 2). Accused Iqrar Khan was present near the cot of the dead body. The Investigating Officer Jai Vir Singh (P.W. 8) arrested him and recorded his statement also. On 16.6.1979 he recorded the statements of Bashir Husain and Tajammul Husain and, thereafter, submitted charge-sheet against the accused on 21.6.1979. This charge-sheet is Ext. Ka-10. In this case the marriage is admitted by the accused but has denied rest of the allegations of the prosecution and pleaded not guilty. We are not extracting the entire statement made by the accused under Section 313, Cr. P.C. which is already on record. 5. The prosecution in this case has examined Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1), mother of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum, Pirru Khan (P.W. 2) and Bashir Husain (P.W. 3) as eye-witnesses. Dr. A. P. Misra has been examined as P.W. 4. He conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum. Sadaqat Husain (P.W.5) who is not an eye-witness, had lodged the first information report. Dr. A. P. Misra has been examined as P.W. 4. He conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum. Sadaqat Husain (P.W.5) who is not an eye-witness, had lodged the first information report. The scribe of the first information report has not been examined. Ram Pratap Singh (P.W. 6) is the Bead Constable, who prepared the Chik report. Neta Singh (P.W. 7) is the S. I. who) prepared the inquest report and Jai Vir Singh (P.W. 8) is the Investigating Officer. 6. After hearing learned counsel for (the accused and also the State counsel the Court below acquitted the accused, as indicated above, after giving his reasonings in detail. The court below has discarded the evidence of the eyewitnesses and we fully agree with the reasonings and uphold the finding recorded by the Court below. It is, however, necessary to point out that Dr. A. P. Misra conducted the post mortem examination on the body of Smt. Hajra Begum on 14.6.1979 at 10.30 a.m. He stated that the deceased was about 30 years of age and the duration of her death was 11/4 days. The body was of average built. Rigor mortis had passed off from the upper extremities but was present in the lower extremities. There was greenish coloration on iliac fossea, Face was pale and swollen and there was bleeding from nose. The eye on the left side was congested but on the right side there was sub-conjuctival haemorrhage. Dr. A. P. Misra found the following ante-mortem external injuries on the body of Smt. Hajra Begum: 1. Contusion 9 cm. x 4 cm. in front of the neck and below the thyroid cartilage. On cut, blood underneath was found, 2 Two small abrasions 1 cm. x 0.75 cm. and 1 cm. x 0.5 cm. near the ankle of left mandible, 2 cm. apart from each other and below the left ear. 3 Contusion on the right side of the face 9 cm. x 7 cm. including right orbital fossa, upper and lower eye-lids and extending downwards, sub-conjuctival haemorrhage was present. 4 Abrasion 1 cm. x 0.5 cm. on the anterior surface of the right wrist. 5 Multiple abrasions on posterior medical surface of the middle of left forearm extending downwards. Clotted blood was found on the surface. 6 Multiple contusions in an area of 15 cm. x 14 cm. 4 Abrasion 1 cm. x 0.5 cm. on the anterior surface of the right wrist. 5 Multiple abrasions on posterior medical surface of the middle of left forearm extending downwards. Clotted blood was found on the surface. 6 Multiple contusions in an area of 15 cm. x 14 cm. on the back just below the lower scapular, region. Dr. Misra stated that on internal examination of the dead body he found the brain and pleura as also both the lungs congested. Thyroid cartilage and upper tracheal rings were found fractured. The walls of the abdomen were distended about full term and the abdominal cavity was occupied by gravid uterus. The oesophagus, stomach and liver were congested. Dr. Misra has stated that he had recovered a dead male child from the uterus and it was about 8 months' old. In his opinion the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of strangulation. 7. From a perusal of the above post mortem examination report it is clear that the murder of Smt. Hajra Begum was committed by strangulation sometimes in the morning of 13.6.1979. 8. Now we are referring the statement of P.W. 1 Smt. Aliman. It appears from her statement that she made substantial improvements in her statement upon her original version given by her under Section 161, Cr. P.C. She has stated that when the accused struck on the abdomen of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum she fell down on the ground unconscious. She tried to pour some water in her mouth and then accused Iqrar Khan said that he would kill her on that day by strangulation. Saying that the accused Iqrar Khan picked up Smt. Hajara Begum and laid her on the cot and then pressed her neck with both his hands causing her murder. However, in her cross-examination she has stated that when she narrated the entire occurrence before [her son (Sadaqat Husain the complainant) she had also informed him about the statement that accused Iqrar Khan had said at the time of occurrence that he would kill Smt. Hajra Begum by pressing her neck and then he had picked her and laid her on the cot and thereafter pressed her neck causing her death. However, these facts are not stated in the first information report although Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) in her statement has clearly stated that she has stated everything to the complainant, who had lodged the first information report. It is also significant to note that the above facts are not mentioned in the statement given by Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) before the Investigating Officer under Section 161, Cr. P.C. and when she was confronted she insisted on saying that she had told Darogaji about all the facts but he cannot say as to why the said Investigating Officer did not write the same in her statement. Thus, it appears that the above story that the accused had said, at the time of the occurrence, that he would kill Smt. Hajra Begum by pressing her neck and later he had laid her on a cot anil had then pressed her neck with both his hands causing her murder, was concocted as a result of afterthought and stated for the first time before the court below with a view to connect the accused directly with the present crime. We have examined the statement of Jai Vir Singh (P.W. 8). He has stated in paragraph 4 of the statement that he came to know after examining the post mortem examination report of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum that she was killed by strangulation. Thus, it cannot be ruled out that Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) was compelled to make the statement by the prosecution for explaining the post mortem examination report. In fact, Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) should have normally said these glaring and important facts to his son Sadaqat Husain (P.W. 5) who had lodged the first information report. But this fact is conspicuous by the absence in the first information report. Thus it cannot also be ruled out that, in fact, Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) was not present at the spot otherwise this fact should have come in the first information report and also in her statement recorded under Section 161, Cr. But this fact is conspicuous by the absence in the first information report. Thus it cannot also be ruled out that, in fact, Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) was not present at the spot otherwise this fact should have come in the first information report and also in her statement recorded under Section 161, Cr. P.C. Thus, the story that the accused Iqrar Khan had said at the time of the occurrence that he would kill Smt. Hajra Begum by pressing her neck and later he had laid her on a cot and had then pressed her neck with both his hands causing her murder, has only been concocted as a result of afterthought for roping the accused in the present case and also for explaining the medical evidence. Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) also submitted for the first time in the court below that accused Iqrar Khan had beaten Smt. Hajra Begum and had turned hex out of his house 5 or 6 times before and sometimes he used to demand a cycle: and sometimes a radio and since she was a poor lady, she could not afford those articles and hence the accused used to beat Smt. Hajra Begum off and on. These facts are also not stated in the first information report, Ext. Ka-2, although Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) has clearly stated that she had informed her son at the time of the occurrence that the accused Iqrar Khan used to demand cycle and radio and on that account used to beat Smt. Hajra Begum. The above facts are also conspicuous by absence in her statement under Section 161, Cr. P.C. She explained the omission by putting the blame on Darogajl. The Court below after giving detail reasons has rightly come to the conclusion that Smt. Aliman, who is the mother of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum and is interested in deposing against the accused had made substantial improvement in her statement with a view to implicate the accused with the crime. Hence her testimony about the occurrence cannot be held free from doubt. Yet there is another reason to discard the testimony of Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1). Her statement is not at all consistent with the medical evidence of Dr. A.P. Misra. Hence her testimony about the occurrence cannot be held free from doubt. Yet there is another reason to discard the testimony of Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1). Her statement is not at all consistent with the medical evidence of Dr. A.P. Misra. Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) has stated in her cross-examination that at the time accused Iqrar Khan gave a kick on the abdomen of the deceased he was putting a leather shoe. Bashir Husain (P.W. 3) also stated that the accused had kicked her with great force with the result that the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum had fell down. A perusal of the medical evidence and also the statement of Dr. A. P. Misra makes it clear that the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum had not received any injury on her abdomen nor the deceased's unborn child indicated any sign of such injuries. Dr. A. P. Misra has clearly stated that he did not find any injury whatsoever on the abdomen of the deceased nor he found any injury on the child that the deceased was carrying and that the death of the said child occurred as a result of strangulation of the mother Smt. Hajra Begum. Dr. A. P. Misra has also stated that injury No. 1 on the neck of the deceased was not possible by pressing the neck of the deceased by both hands instead it was caused by putting some hard substance on the neck and pressing it by force or by pressing foot on the neck. This statement of Dr. A. P. Misra also creates doubt on the statement of Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1), who stated that she was strangulated by hands. The court below has discussed this aspect of the matter in great detail and we have no reason to depart from the finding of the court below on this aspect. The finding of the court below that the testimony of Smt Aliman (P.W. 1) about the main occurrence neither inspite confidence nor can be held to be truthful and reliable and hence it has to be rejected, is upheld by us. Pirru Khan (P.W. 2) and Bashir Husain (P.W. 3) are chance witnesses. In fact, Bashir Husain (P.W. 3) has not seen the strangulation part of the story. Pirru Khan (P.W. 2) and Bashir Husain (P.W. 3) are chance witnesses. In fact, Bashir Husain (P.W. 3) has not seen the strangulation part of the story. In fact, in his deposition he has stated that he had left the place after the deceased was kicked and became unconscious to inform about it to Sadaqat Husain (P.W. 5). Pirru Khan (P.W. 2) has also not stated anything regarding the strangulation. He only had stated that the accused had pressed the deceased. He had stated that when Smt. Hajra Begum fell down unconscious said that she was fringing and she should be set right by him and thereafter accused Iqrar Khan had pressed her (DABALIYA). He had clearly stated that Iqrar Khan had pressed her both shoulders. Thus, the story narrated by Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) that the deceased was killed by accused Iqrar Khan by pressing her throat with his hands is neither supported by Pirru Khan (P.W. 2), Bashir Husain (P.W. 3) and the medical evidence also contradicts the same. We have already rejected the testimony of Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) and there is no question of putting any reliance on the testimony of Pirru Khan (P.W. 2) and Bashir Husain (P.W. 3). They are chance witnesses and we agree with the court below that the witness as Pirru Khan (P.W. 2) and Bashir Husain (P.W. 3) are not only got up and chance witnesses but they are: interested in deposing against the accused being either inimical to him or being neighbour of Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1). They had not seen the occurrence at all. Hence their testimony about the main occurrence has also to be discarded completely. The testimony of P.W. 5 Sadaqat Husain, who has lodged the first Information report, scribed by somebody else who has not been produced, and is not an eye-witness deserves to be discarded. Once have discarded the testimony of Smt. Aliman (P.W. 1) there is no question of relying upon any part of the statement of Sadaqat Husain (P.W. 5). 9. It shall not be out of place to mention that the Investigating Officer Jai Vir Singh (P.W. 8) in his statement has clearly stated that he arrested the accused Iqrar Khan at the time when he was sitting near the cot of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum. 9. It shall not be out of place to mention that the Investigating Officer Jai Vir Singh (P.W. 8) in his statement has clearly stated that he arrested the accused Iqrar Khan at the time when he was sitting near the cot of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum. He had also stated that he came to know for the first time regarding the death of the deceased Smt. Hajra Begum by strangulation after perusing the post mortem examination. Thus, it cannot be excluded that the lacuna which was in the first Information report was attempted to be filled up by so-called eyewitnesses for supporting the case of the prosecution. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and also examining the entire material on record we uphold the finding recorded by the court below. The order of acquittal recorded by the court below in favour of the accused Iqrar Khan is quite legal and justified and we uphold the same. 10. In the result, we dismiss this Government Appeal. The respondent Iqrar Khan is on bail. His bail bonds are cancelled and sureties are discharged. Appeal dismissed.