SURYA PRASAD, J. These two connected criminal appeals are against the judgment and order dated 20-4-79 by the then learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Etah in Sessions Trial No. 457 of 1978 convicting the appel lants under Section 302 read with Section 34, I. P. C. and Section 201, I. P. C. and sentencing them to undergo imprisonment for life and five years Rigorous Imprisonment respectively thereunder. 2. The prosecution case briefly stated is that Yogendra Upadhyaya PW 1 made a report at the police station on 6-9-77 lo the effect that his grand-father Shiv Shanker Lal was murdered in the night intervening 5/6 September, 1977 at about 1. 00 a. m. while he was living in his hut out 01 the village. His dead body was thrown into the well existing in the chak. In the morning the dead body was taken out of the well. It was found that he was murdered after several injures having been inflicted to him. There was bleeding on the door as well as on the cot and its bedding etc. Yogendra. Upadhyaya, PW 1 suspected the murder of his grand-father due to some enmity in respect of certain land. It was also mentioned in the First Informa tion Report that he would disclose the names of the miscreants after ascertain ing the same. On the basis of the First Information Report Ex. Ka-1 the then head Constable Janki Prasad PW 5 prepared the chick report made entry in the general diary and ultimately registered a case. After the registration of the case its investigation was entrusted to the then Sub-Inspector Om Prakash Dubey PW 6, who visited the spot and prepared the inquest report etc. regarding the dead body of Shiv Shanker Lal. He sent the dead body to the mortuary for post-mortem examination. He inspected the place of occurrence and prepared its site-plan Ex. Ka-11. He took down the statements of certain witness. On 20- 9-77 he enterrogated Stm. Kiran Devi and arrested Dinesh on 24-10-77. The appellants, accused were arrested by the Amanpur police and sent to jail. Later on he sent blood stained cloths etc. for chemical examination. 3. Dr. Virendra Srivastava conducted the post-mortem examination of the dead body of Shiv Shanker Lal on 7-9-77 at 2. 45 p. m. and found the following ante-mortem injuries thereon: 1. Incised wound on scalp 4 cm. X 1/2 cm. Later on he sent blood stained cloths etc. for chemical examination. 3. Dr. Virendra Srivastava conducted the post-mortem examination of the dead body of Shiv Shanker Lal on 7-9-77 at 2. 45 p. m. and found the following ante-mortem injuries thereon: 1. Incised wound on scalp 4 cm. X 1/2 cm. X muscle deep 5 cm. above left eye brow. 2. Stab wound 1/2 cm. X 1/2 cm. X muscle deep 3 cm. above right eye brow. 3. Wound 1 cm. X 1 cm. X muscle deep 1 cm. above right eye brow. 4. Stab wound 3 cm. X 1/2 cm. below right eye obliquely placed. On further dissection, this wound was found piercing brain. 5. Abrasion 1 cm. X 1 cm. situated 6 cm. above condyle of humerus left in same line. 6. Wound 3 cm. X 2 cm. on the dorsal aspect at M. P. joint of left thumb. 7. Wound at palmer aspect 3 cm. x 1/2 cm. at left thumb M. P. joint Bone projecting cut the wound which was out. 8. Lacerated wound transervely placed 15 cm. X 4 cm. x 14 cm. below left exila. 9. Abrasion 7 cm. X 4 cm. x 6 cm. above right pelvic on left side of back. 4. On internal examination, he found 9th and 10th ribs fractured. Small and large intestines were partially filled. Gallblader was partially filled. In his opinion the death was due to haemorrhage in the brain due to injury No. 4. 5. On the receipt of the post-mortem report and |after completion of the investigation into the case, he submitted the charge-sheet against the appellants-accused. The prosecution examined Yogendra Upadhyaya PW 1, Sachida Nand PW 2, Sheo Ram PW 3, Smt. Kiran Devi PW 4, Janki Prasad PW 5 and Om Prakash Dubey PW 6 and relied upon certain documents in support of its case. 6. The accused pleaded not guilty. They have stated that all the allegations levelled against them are wholly wrong and incorrect. They have displayed their ignorance regarding many of the facts relating to the case. They have also stated that have been falsely implicated in this case on account of enmity. 7. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and having consider ed the evidence on record, the learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Etah convicted and sentenced the appellants-accused through his impugned judgment and order. They have also stated that have been falsely implicated in this case on account of enmity. 7. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and having consider ed the evidence on record, the learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Etah convicted and sentenced the appellants-accused through his impugned judgment and order. Aggrieved, they preferred this appeal against the same. 8. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the evidence on record. 9. Sheo Shanker Lal deceased had two sons named Shiv Dayal and Ram Niwas, Shiv Dayal had four sons named Radhey Shyam (Accused), Sheo Ram, Yogendra Upadhyay informant (PW 1) and Sada Nand (PW 2), Ram Niwas had loui bons named Ramesh, Suresh, Dinesh (Accused) and Anil. The accused Rameshwar Dayal is closely related to them. Smt. Kiran Devi is the wife of Shiv Dayal. Shiv Shanker Lal deceased used to live in a hut situated at a distance of one mile from the village. The name of any of the accused or that of any body else is not mentioned in the First Information Report Ex. Ka-1. The incident is alleged to have taken place at 1. 00 am. in the night intervening 5th/6th September, 1977. The distance between the place of occurrence and the police station is six miles. The First Information Report was lodged by Yogendra Upadhyaya PW 1 on 6-9-79 at 2. 00 p. m. Yogendra Uyadhyaya PW 1 has specifically mentioned in the report Ex. Ka-1 that he will disclose the names of the miscreants later on after ascertaining the same. This means that he was not at all in the knowledge of the alleged fact that the accused had murdered Shiv Shanker Lal till he lodged the First Information Report at the police station. All these facts cannot be said to be in dispute on the basis of the evidence on record. Sadanan PW 2 has allegedly sent two applications Ex. Ka-2 and Ex. Ka-3 to the Superintendent of Police, Etah and the station Officer of Police Station Bagwala, Etah respectively regarding the incident. The question is whether Sadanand PW 2 had seen the accused murdering Shiv Shanker Lal or not. The asserts having gone quite alone to the aforesaid Kutiya in the dead of night i. e. 12. Ka-2 and Ex. Ka-3 to the Superintendent of Police, Etah and the station Officer of Police Station Bagwala, Etah respectively regarding the incident. The question is whether Sadanand PW 2 had seen the accused murdering Shiv Shanker Lal or not. The asserts having gone quite alone to the aforesaid Kutiya in the dead of night i. e. 12. 30 a. m. to give food to Shiv Shanker Lal as he had observed fast on account of the suspicious occasion known as the Krishan Janamastami. The accused met him near the Kothari where he was standing after giving food to Shiv Shanker Lal. According to him, the accused came to Shiv Shanker Lal and started talking to him. They demanded money from Shiv Shanker Lal, who refused to give, whereupon they started cutting him. After murdering him, they threw his dead body into a well. Having seen him (Sadanand) the accused threatened to kill him and kept him confined in the Kothari. He had remained confined in the Kothari till 8. 00 a. m. when the village people including Yogendra Upadhyaya PW 1, Sheo Ram PW Sand Smt. Kiran Devi PW 4 happened to reach there. They took him out of the Kothari. He had told them that the accused had thrown the dead body of Shiv Shanker Lal into the well after murdering him. It was then that the dead body of Shiv Shanker Lal was taken out of the well. Yogendra Upadhyaya PW 1 had then expressed that he would lodge a report at the police station, but surpri singly enough Yogendra Upadhyaya PW 1 has categorically stated that he had not met Sadanand PW 2, Sheo Ram PW 3 or Smt. Kiran Devi PW 4 before proceeding to the police station. Nor had he talked to his parent or any of his brothers before lodging the First Information Report. Not only this but he has also categorically stated that he had proceeded to the police station for lodging the report before his brother or mother reached the dead body of Shiv Shanker Lal. He came to know of the murder of Shiv Shanker Lal through Sadanand PW 2 and Sheo Ram PW 3 only when he returned after lodging the report at the police station. He came to know of the murder of Shiv Shanker Lal through Sadanand PW 2 and Sheo Ram PW 3 only when he returned after lodging the report at the police station. Therefore, he had no occasion to meet Sadanand PW 2, Sheo Ram PW 3 or Smt. Kiran Devi PW 4 or vice versa before proceeding to the police station for lodging the First Information Report. Had Sadanand PW 2 met him and had he told him that the accused had thrown the dead body of Shiv Shanker Lal into the well after murdering him, he, Yogendra Upadhyaya PW 1, would have certainly mentioned the names of the accused as murderers in the First Information report Ex. Ka-1 instead of mentioning therein that he would disclone the names of the miscre ants/murderers after ascertaning the same. 10. Sadanand PW 2 has further asserted that he had told the Investi gating Officer that the accused had thrown the dead body of Shiv Shanker Lal after murdering him and on his protest they kept him confined in the Kothari. But suprisingly enough there is nothing as such in his statement under Sec tion 161, Cr. P. C. 11. The applications Ex. Ka-2 and Ex. Ka-3 are also conspicuously silent on the point of his alleged confinement in the Kutia or Kothari. Had there been any ringe of truth in the statement of his alleged confinement in the said Kutia or Kothari, he must have mentioned the same in one way or the other in the said applications. These applications show, inter alia, that the accused Rameshwar Dayal had caught hold of him, that he had been standing there ; that the accused Dinesh and Radhey Shyam caught hold of him after throwing the dead body of Shiv Shanker Lal into the well that accused Radhey Shayam had alapped him (Sadanand); that they took him to the house and kept him confined in a Cachha Marha; that he had been weep ing therein till long after sun rise ; that he expressed that he would sit the door by sprinkling kerosene oil and setting the fire to it by producing it with a lighted match stick and that it was then that the accused opended the door with the direction that he would not go any where. But Sadanand has gone a complete go bye to all these facts mentioned in the said applications for reasons best known to him. 12. Sadanand PW 2 has stated that the accused Radhey Shyam, Rameshwar Dayal and Dinesh have a knife, a Khurpa and a sickle respectively with them. But the above applications Ex. Ka-2 and Ex. Ka-3 point out that they had knife etc, with them. There is no specific reason assigned to any of the accused therein, the statement of Sadanand and the applications Ex. Ka-2 and Ex. Ka-3, if carefully read together, would show that the manner and mode in which Shiv Shanker Lal is alleged to have been murdered is not at all proved. Sadanand had been standing and seeing as a silent pectator the accused murdering Shiv Shanker Lal. He did not try to run away. Therefore, his act and conduct appears to be most unnatural. 13. We have now to scrutinise the statement of Sadanand PW2 about the applications Ex, Ka-2 and Ex. Ka-3. He has stated that he had sent the application Ex. Ka-2 to the Superintendent of Police, Etah by registered post. Whereas he had handed over the application Ex. Ka-3 to the Station Officer of the Police Station, Bagwala personally. But both the applications purport to have been sent by the registered post. He has further stated that he had sent these applications to the Superintendent of Police, Etah and the Station Officer concerned next day of the occurrence, but these applications are dated 5th October, 1977. He has further stated that he had prepared the draft of the applications himself. But he does not know the meaning of the word "adhik-chak" as mentioned at the top of the application Ex. Ka-2. These applica tions are typed one. Therefore, his statement to the contrary is wrong and incorrect. 14. In view of all this, no implict reliance can be placed on these application or the statement of Sadanand PW 2 in regard to the same. Sadan and had filed an affidavit dated 18-1-78 wherein it has been categorically mentioned that the appellant accused had not murdered Shiv Shanker Lal and that they are innocent. He has, however, tried to show that he had filed this affidavit not voluntarily or of his own accord, but certainly on the pres sure exerted by the accused on him. Sadan and had filed an affidavit dated 18-1-78 wherein it has been categorically mentioned that the appellant accused had not murdered Shiv Shanker Lal and that they are innocent. He has, however, tried to show that he had filed this affidavit not voluntarily or of his own accord, but certainly on the pres sure exerted by the accused on him. He did not make any complaint or report to this effect against the accused. Therefore, his statement carries no weight. 15. From the observations made above, it is abundantly clear that Sadanand had not actually seen the accused murdering Shiv Shanker Lal. The above posted question, therefore, admits of no other answer than in the negative. 16. Sheoram P W 3 and Smt. Kiran Devi PW 4 have turned hostile. Consequently the learned Counsel for the prosecution cross-examined them, but he could not be able to elicit anything farourable to the prosecution case in their cross-examination. 17. The eye-witnesses named above have scribed the truth at the alter of the falsehood. There is no evidence worth relying to prove the pro secution case against the appellants accused. The learned Additional Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellants-Accused on the basis of conjectures and suspicion. His approach is erroneous. Such judgment and order cannot, therefore, be sustainable. 18. In the result these appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment and order is set aside. The appellants accused Radhey Shyam and Rameshwar Dayal are acquitted of the offences with which they have been charted. They are on bail. Their bail bonds are cancelled and sureties stand discharged. They need not surrender. Appeal allowed .