R. D. SHUKLA, J. ( 1 ) THE appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 104. 1989 of 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain, passed in S. T. No. 231/87, whereby the accused-appellants have been convicted under Section 302/34 I. P. C. for having committed murder of Ramsingh sb Heera Moghiya, on the intervening night of 28th and 29th September, 1987 at village Palwa, on the outskirts a near. Ujjain-Ghosla Road and each of them have been sentenced to imprisonment for life. ( 2 ) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that a dead body was located in the Soya been field of village Palwa by Radheshyam, who happened go to the place, while coming back after watching his field through the road referred above. Radheshyam informed the. villagers and the Chowkidar and, thereafter, a report was lodged in Police Station Raghvi, which was registered by Shamsuddin Ansari (PW 13) at Crime No. 17/87. He prepared inquest report and called all other villagers. Tejubai w/o deceased identified the body to be of Ramsingh (her husband ). The body was sent for postmortem. examination with a letter of request. Autopsy on the body was done by Dr. M. D. Varun (PW 1), who found one lacerated wound 1/2 x 1/2 x 1/4, above left eye brow. There was a ligature mark on the neck and the blister over the neck of deceased. On dissection pleura larynx, trachea found pulpy and lungs swelling Dr. Varun opined that the deceased died of asphyxia because of throttling and prepared a report Ex. P/i. During investigation it was revealed that on 28. 9. 87 deceased had gone for purchasing she buffalo in village market Ghosla. Accused persons Gopi s/c Rama, Banesingh s/c Gopi and Ramchandra s/o Naharji met him in the market. Accused persons having strained relation with the deceased, some talks of compromise was also held. These accused persons, as such, has grudge against the deceased. All of them consumed liquor and killed him while coming back to their residential places. All the three accused persons absconded after the report of death of Ramsingh came to the light. After investigation, accused persons were prosecuted. The learned Trial Judge has acquitted accused Ramchandra and convicted present accused-appellants as above. Hence, this appeal. All of them consumed liquor and killed him while coming back to their residential places. All the three accused persons absconded after the report of death of Ramsingh came to the light. After investigation, accused persons were prosecuted. The learned Trial Judge has acquitted accused Ramchandra and convicted present accused-appellants as above. Hence, this appeal. ( 3 ) THE contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants is that the circumstantial evidence adduced against the accused persons is not sufficient to connect them with the crime. It has further been submitted that the finding as to last seen is also incorrect and not supported by clear\and cogent evidence. As against it, learned Counsel for the State has supported the prosecution case and submitted that the accused persons were seen consuming liquor with the deceased and the deceased was found dead next day. As such, it is a connecting link which has rightly been accepted. ( 4 ) WE were taken to the evidence on record. The learned trial Judge has enumerated the fact and circumstantial evidence appearing against the accused in para 22 of the judgment. The first circumstance accepted is that accused persons were having strained relation with the deceased because of dispute about the landed property. Secondly, the deceased started for village mf3rket Ghosla from Kalyahedi. Accused persons had also gone to that village market after the deceased. Thirdly, Bhagirath had located accused persons near the place where Ramsingh was looking for she buffalo and they had also started back to home following the deceased. Lastly, some blood marks have, been found, vide report Ex. P 129, on the clothes (Doti and Baniyan) sized from accused Gopi and Banesingh. ( 5 ) IT is an established principle of criminal jurisprudence that the chain of circumstantial evidence should be so complete that it is not only consistent with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, but should be totally inconsistent with the hypothesis of innocence of the accused. Facts proved must lead to irresistible conclusion of the guilt of the accused. The enmity is a double edged Weapon. If it can be a motive for murder the same can be a motive for false implication as well. ( 6 ) WE have perused the document Ex. P1 29 (Chemical Examiners report, in original ). Facts proved must lead to irresistible conclusion of the guilt of the accused. The enmity is a double edged Weapon. If it can be a motive for murder the same can be a motive for false implication as well. ( 6 ) WE have perused the document Ex. P1 29 (Chemical Examiners report, in original ). Blood had been found on the earth seized from the spot ant clothes seized from the body of the deceased and further blood has been found from the Baniyan seized from accused Banesingh and 19th seized from both the accused persons, but the same and, therefore, mere presence of blood in the lathi or on the clothes of accused will not be sufficient to connect them with the crime as these accused persons are villagers working in the field and walking through jungles and grassy land and therefore, the blood may be found on the clothes and the lathi because of other reasons as well. In our opinion, therefore, that itself would not be sufficient to connect the accused persons with the crime. ( 7 ) NOW, therefore, we shall examine the evidence of last seen as to whether the deceased was last seen alongwith the accused persons. PW 2 has only seen the dead body and lodged Murg report. PW 2 Tejabai w/o deceased has stated that her husband has gone to village market Ghosla alongwith she buffalo and accused persons Gopi, Banesingh and Ramchandra also went to village Ghosla. Bhagirath has also gone alongwith her husband Rainsingh. Her husband did not return in the evening. Next day Bhagirath came all alone and, therefore, she enquired about her husband. Bhagirath told her that accused persons Gopi, Banesingh and Ramchandra were consuming liquor with Ramsingh. He, therefore, left them in the market and came to his village in the evening. ( 8 ) BHAGIRATH (PW 5) bas not corroborated the story and has been declared hostile. Even otherwise PW 6 Dhula, who has been examined to prove the fact of accused persons being seen together on the previous evening has also turned hostile and not supported the case of the prosecution. However, in this case as Bhagirath has not supported the case of having seen accused persons consuming liquor with the deceased. The same cannot be found to be proved merely on the statement of Tejabai, who received information from Bhagirath and other witnesses. However, in this case as Bhagirath has not supported the case of having seen accused persons consuming liquor with the deceased. The same cannot be found to be proved merely on the statement of Tejabai, who received information from Bhagirath and other witnesses. ( 9 ) PW 11 Bhanwarial has proved the fact of dispute between accused persons and deceased and the fact of declaration by accused persons that he should try for a compromise between them and Ramsingh. This by itself would not be a ground for connecting accused persons with the crime. The maximum what can be said on the basis of this evidence is that there was some dispute of property between accused persons and the deceased. PW 12 Ranjit, who has been examined for proving the fact of last seen and consuming liquor with the deceased, has not supported the prosecution story and has been declared hostile and, therefore, his evidence is of no avail to the prosecution. ( 10 ) GHOSLA is a village market, where is a liquor shop. There, many persons purchase and consume liquor in front of such liquor shops and, therefore, mere presence of the three accused persons before the shop where deceased Ramsingh was taking liquor will not be sufficient to connect them with the crime. ( 11 ) THUS, in our considered opinion there is no evidence of last seen against the accused persons. Merely because they were seen in the market where Ramsingh was also present alongwith she buffalo, the fact of last seen cannot be accepted to have been proved. This is also not known as to what happened to the she buffalo, the deceased has taken for sale in the market. There is no evidence to show sale and sale proceed of she buffalo. Recovery of she buffalo could give some clue to the incident, but it appears the Investigating Officer had not tried to investigate the case from that angle. In our opinion, therefore, the evidence collected and proved by the prosecution is not sufficient to connect the accused persons with the crime and, thus, they are entitled at least to benefit of reasonable doubt. ( 12 ) AS a result, the appeal succeeds. The accused persons are acquitted of the offence u/sec. 302/34 I. P. C. They are on bail, their bail bonds are discharged. Appeal allowed. .