Accused Chandrika Prasad and Ram Baran have been con victed by the learned Sessions Judge, Fatehpur vide his judgment and order dated 19-3-81 passed in S. T No. 103 of 1980, State v. Chandrika Prasad and one other on the charge under section 302/34, I. P. C. and sentenced to undergo life im prisonment. Accused Ram Baran further stands charge under section 307, IPC and after being held guilty, has been sentenced to undergo 3 years R. I. Accused Chandrika Prasad further stands con victed on a charge under section 307/34, IPC and ordered to undergo 3 years R. I. Both the sentences of both the accused- ap pellants, are directed to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution case started on the basis of a F. I. R. Exhibit Ka 1, lodged by Smt. Vidyawati, (P. W. I), vidow of Ram Ratan (deceased in this case) on 2. 11. 79 at 3. 15 a. m. In it the incident is said to have taken place on 1/2-11-79 around mid night. The distance of the police station from the place of occurrence, is three miles. She has mentioned therein that she alongwith her husband Ram Ratan. (deceased) resided in village Sungaon, PS. Tharion, Distt. Fatehpur. Alongwith them, her mother-in-law Smt. Janki wife of Cneeda Lal resided. The village Sun gaon is the parental village of Smt. Vidyawali, P. W. 1, complainant. Her hus band originally belonged to Gram Padarathpur, Dist. Banda. There was a dispute between the deceased Ram Ratan and other collaterals with regard to the property of village Padrathpur and the ac cused and other family members. The rela tions between her husband and other col laterals had became so bad that the col laterals wanted to kill Ram Ratan. There fore, in order to save his life, Ram Ratan alongwith his mother and wife Smt. Vidyawati left the village Padarathpur about three years prior to the incident dated 1/2-11 -79 and started residing in vil lage Sungaon for security purposes. Even then the accused Chandrika Prasad and Ram Baran (who is the Sala of Barku, a collateral of complainant) used to visit village Sungaon quite often. In the night of occurrence (1/2-11-73) the complainant was sleeping alongwith her husband on the same cot inside the inner courtyard. At a small distance from there, her mother-in-law was also sleeping on a different cot. In the night of occurrence (1/2-11-73) the complainant was sleeping alongwith her husband on the same cot inside the inner courtyard. At a small distance from there, her mother-in-law was also sleeping on a different cot. Around 12 a. m. she got some inkling and awoke. She saw that the accused Chandrika Prasad and Ram Baran alongwith two other unknown persons were standing near her cot. Small Dibbi was giving light and within it, she iden tified correctly both the accused and saw the faces up to the other unknown persons, also whom she recognized and can still identify as and when opportunity arises. Chandrika Prasad fired at her husband Ram Ratan with a single barrel gun and Ram Baran, accused assaulted her with a country-made pistol. She received injuries in her right thigh. She and her mother-in-law raised an alarm. Meanwhile Chandrika Prasad accused and Ram Baran, accused assaulted Ram Ratan with their weapons. Hearing the alarm, Moti Lal, P. W 3, who is the real brother of the complainant, Yashodanand, Daya Shankar, Ram Ashrey, P. W 2, Satya Narain Shukla, Shyam Lal and several other persons of the village arrived. The accused opened the main door of the house and escaped towards the south. The witnesses had also torches, which they were flashing and with their help, they had identified the culprits. While escaping, one of the unknown miscreants, took away her transistor and Rs. 500/-, which she had concealed therein. The miscreants had entered her house with the help of a lad der. After giving her husbands body in the personal custody of the villagers, she had come to the P. S. for lodging the report. 3. On the basis of this written report, H. C. Sri Krishna Deo Verma, P. W. 5 registered the case in the G. D. on 2-11-79 at 3. 15 a. m. and prepared the Chik, Exhibit Ka 6. The S. O. Sri Uma Kant Sachan, P. W. 7 was also present at the time of registra tion of the case. Smt. Vidyawati had received injuries. Therefore, Chhithi Maj-rubi was prepared by this witness and she was sent for medical examination at Distt. Hospital, Fatehpur (Exhibit Ka 8 ). 4. Dr. R. K. Katiyar, P. W. 8 medically examined Smt. Vidyawati on 2-11-79 at about 9 a. m. and found the following in juries on her person:- 1. Smt. Vidyawati had received injuries. Therefore, Chhithi Maj-rubi was prepared by this witness and she was sent for medical examination at Distt. Hospital, Fatehpur (Exhibit Ka 8 ). 4. Dr. R. K. Katiyar, P. W. 8 medically examined Smt. Vidyawati on 2-11-79 at about 9 a. m. and found the following in juries on her person:- 1. Two gunshot wounds of entry adjacent to each other measuring 2 cm. x 1-1/2 cm x muscle deep and 1 cm. x 1/4 cm x muscle deep on the lateral aspect of the middle part of the right thigh. 2. Abrasion 3/4 cm. x 3/4 cm. on the lateral aspect of the middle part of the right thigh 1 cm. downwards obliquely and medially to the injury No. 1 3. Abrasion 1-1/2 cm. x 1/4 cm. on the lateral aspect of the thigh, 18 cm above the lateral epicedial of the femur, obliquely. All the injuries were caused by fire arm and were simple, except injury No. 1, which was kept under observation. In the opinion of the Doctor, the abrasions could be caused by friction against the Charpai. 5. Sri Uma Kant Sachan, I. O. , P. W. 7 was present at the time of registration of the case. The chik report bears his signa tures. He took the investigation in his hands immediately and interrogated Smt. Vidyawati, complainant and Sri Satya Narain. Smt. Vidyawati had injuries on her person. Therefore, she was directed for medical examination and the I. O. started for the place of occurrence at about 5. 30 a. m. There he found the dead body of Ram Ratan lying on a cot and he took the same in his possession and after appointment of Panchas, be held an inquest thereon (Ex hibit Ka 2 ). Thereafter, he got the dead- body sealed and reported the matter for post-mortem examination alongwith other relevant documents through Con stable Sri Kamla Kant and Chowkidar Sri Ram Prasad. Thereafter, he inspected the spot and prepared the site-plan. He took into possession the Kathari lying upon the cot of the deceased soaked with blood. He collected the blood-stained and simple earth from the spot and after keeping and sealing them in separate containers, prepared memos for that. Thereafter, he inspected the spot and prepared the site-plan. He took into possession the Kathari lying upon the cot of the deceased soaked with blood. He collected the blood-stained and simple earth from the spot and after keeping and sealing them in separate containers, prepared memos for that. The blood stained Small from the cot upon which the deceased was lying, was taken (some pieces) and he prepared memo for that, after sealing the same. He found one bam boo ladder inside the inter courtyard and after taking the same into possession, he prepared the Supurdiginama (Exhibit Ka 3 ). He also collected the lamp (Chirag) and after sealing the same, he prepared the memo for the same. He also examined the torch of Sri Satya Narain and after finding it in proper working order, he prepared a memo for that (Exhibit Ka 5 ). The sealed articles were later on despatched to the Sadar Malkahan through Constable Sri Govardhan. He also interrogated Smt. Janaki, Ram Ashrey, P. W. 2, Moti Lal, P. W. 3 and others. On the same day around p. m. he arrested the accused Chandrika Prasad at a distance of about 8 Kms. from the place of occurrence and recovered from his possession, one gun and three life cartridges. He got them sealed and memo was prepared. Accused Ram Baran sur rendered in the court on 4-12-79. After interrogating him, he concluded the inves tigation and submitted a charge-sheet (Ex hibit Ka 19 ). 6. Dr. J. S. Roy conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Ram Ratan on 3-11-79 at 2. 25 p. m. He found the following ante-mortem injuries upon his person :- 1. One gunshot wound of entrance 1" x 3/4" cavity deep on the front of the left chest 1, 1/3 at 5o Clock to left nipple. The margins were inverted. Blackening and tattooing was present. The fourth left rib was fractured. The direction of the injury was from left to right, slightly in ward and upward. 2. One gunshot wound of entrance 1" x 1" cavity deep (thorax and abdomen) on left shoulder 1,1/2" inward to caroming prominence of the left shoulder joint. Margins were lacerated and inverted. Blackening and tattoo ing was present. The direction of the injury was downwards, inwards and towards the right side. 1st left rib was fractured. 3. 2. One gunshot wound of entrance 1" x 1" cavity deep (thorax and abdomen) on left shoulder 1,1/2" inward to caroming prominence of the left shoulder joint. Margins were lacerated and inverted. Blackening and tattoo ing was present. The direction of the injury was downwards, inwards and towards the right side. 1st left rib was fractured. 3. One gunshot wound of entrance 1"x 1" brain cavity deep on the left side of the face, 2" away from the angle of the mouth and 1, 1/4" away from the left ear. Margins were lacerated and inverted. Blackening and tattooing was present. The direction of the injury was up wards, inwards and to the right. There was frac ture of the mandible, base of the brain, both the parietal bones as well as the occipital bone on the right side. The Doctor recovered 9 big shots, two from the chest and seven from the skull, 70 small shots from the chest and abdomen, two waddings pieces, from the chest and one wadding pieces from the skull. They were all sealed and sent to the Superintendent of Police, Fatehpur through proper channel. 7. The internal examination revealed fracture of both the parietal, occipital, right and left mandible. The brain was lacerated and so also the membranes. The base had been fractured. The first rib on the left side and the 4th rib on the left side had been fractured. The pleura was lacerated. The left and the right lungs were also lacerated and so also the pericardium and the heart. The pericardium was also lacerated alongwith heart. Semi-digested food was present in the stomach and digested food was present in the small intestine, which was lacerated. Small quantity of faucal matter was present in the large intestine, which was also lacerated. The gall bladder was also lacerated. In the opinion of the Doctor, the death was due to shock and haemorrhage, which was caused by the ante-mortem injuries men tioned above and each injury separately was sufficient to cause the death. 8. The prosecution has examined the following witnesses for proving its case. 9. P. W. 1 Smt. Vidyawati is the com plainant. She has narrated the entire story as contained in the F. I. R. She has given the following pedigree:- Beni Dularey Jagannath Cheda Ram Charan Chandrika Ram Barku (Accused- Ratan (His sale is accused appellant (deceased)-wife Ram Baran) complainant. The prosecution has examined the following witnesses for proving its case. 9. P. W. 1 Smt. Vidyawati is the com plainant. She has narrated the entire story as contained in the F. I. R. She has given the following pedigree:- Beni Dularey Jagannath Cheda Ram Charan Chandrika Ram Barku (Accused- Ratan (His sale is accused appellant (deceased)-wife Ram Baran) complainant. Smt. Vidyawati P. W1 This pedigree has not disputed. Originally the entire family resided in Gram Padarathpur, where the deceased had about 42 big has of land. With regard to that land, there was a dispute between the deceased Ram Ratan and Chandrika Prasad and Barku aforesaid. Due to fear of his life, Ram Ratan, deceased had shifted to village Sungaon (his Susural), where the occurrence took place. Thereafter, she details the manner in which the crime was committed. She has additionally stated that her mother-in- law is aged about 75 years and after the death of her only son (deceased Ram Ratan), she was mentally deranged. 10. P. W. 2, Sri Ram Ashrey is the immediate neighbour of the complainant towards the sough-east. His house has been shown by the I. O. in the site-plan by No. 2. He was sleeping inside the house, when he heard the fire shots and cries of the complainant and her mother-in-law, he came out and saw the accused coming towards his house and thereafter, going towards the south. Both the accused- ap pellants were known to him from before. He identified them correctly in the moon light. Thereafter, he proceeded towards the place of occurrence and saw the dead-body of Ram Ratan lyingona cot. 11. P. W. 3 Sri Moti Lal is the real brother of the complainant. His house is towards further east. He also heard the alarm and fire shots and came towards the east of the complainants house. The miscreants were coming and going towards west and thereafter, towards south. Sri Satya Narain flashed his torch. There was moon-light and he identified the culprits in this light, plus the light of the torch flashed by Sri Satya Narain. The accused-appellants were known to him from before. Two others were unknown people. Thereafter, he went inside the house, where a Deepak (chirag) was burn ing and Ram Ratan was lying dead in his cot in a pool of blood. The accused-appellants were known to him from before. Two others were unknown people. Thereafter, he went inside the house, where a Deepak (chirag) was burn ing and Ram Ratan was lying dead in his cot in a pool of blood. At the instance of the complainant, he scribed the F. I. R. and, thereafter, took her signature thereon. She carried the F. I. R. in the same night to the police station. Later on, he was ex amined by the I. O. and some documents were prepared regarding the Supurdagi etc. and the articles recovered from the spot. 12. Sri Satya Narain, P. W. 4, has his house about 30 paces towards the east of the complainants house. Thereafter, he describes that after hearing the fire shots, he came towards east of the house of the complainant. It was a moon-lit night. He had a torch with him, which he flashed and in that light too he identified the culprits (the appellants plus two other unknown persons ). He found Smt. Vidyawati in jured. He took the complainant in his bul lock cart in the same night to police station Dhariaon, where she lodged the report. 13. Other evidence is formal in na ture. For instance, P. W. 5 H. C. Sri Deo Krishna Verma, prepared the chik and G. D. entries and has proved the same, P. W. 7 S. O. Sri Uma Kant Sachan is the Investigating Officer, who has conducted the investigation process from beginning till end and proved the documents prepared in that connection, P. W. 8 Dr. R. K. Katiyar had medically examined Smt. Vidyawati, complainant and proved the injuries as noted above. P. W. 6 Dr. J. S. Roy had con ducted the post- mortem examination on the dead-body of Ram Ratan and had proved the same as noted above. 14. The village Chowkidar Sri Ram Prasad has filed an affidavit, Exhibit Ka 20 to the effect that on 2-11- 79, the I. O. handed over the dead-body to him and Constable Sri Kamla Kant, which he took to the Distt. Headquarters and identified the same. The dead-body remained sealed throughout and none was allowed to inter fere in the same. 15. The accused in their statements under Section 313, Cr. P. C. have generally denied the allegations made against them. Headquarters and identified the same. The dead-body remained sealed throughout and none was allowed to inter fere in the same. 15. The accused in their statements under Section 313, Cr. P. C. have generally denied the allegations made against them. Accused Chandrika Prasad has admitted that the deceased was his collateral and resident of Padarathpur originally. Fur ther, he admits that Ram Ratan, deceased had about 40 big has of land and that land was in dispute and under litigation. But he had no enmity with the deceased. He fur ther admits that Ram Ratan resided with his family members at village Sungaon, but not on account of any fear with him. Ram Ratans land was being cultivated at village Padarathpur at Batai. But he had no grudge against this. Other allegations have been denied by him. He has filed the copy of his written statement in the revenue court in support of his version. 16. Accused Ram Barain has also stated all these facts as done by Chandrika Prasad. But he has denied the existence of any enmity between him and the deceased. He admits that he is the real Sala of Barku, a collateral of the deceased. 17. Some documents have been filed by the accused Chandrika Prasad in sup port of the litigation which have not been challenged before us. The existence of mo tive/enmity between the deceased and the accused, has been dealt with by the learned trial Court at pages 15 and 16 of the judg ment in these words:- "undoubtedly Ram Ratan was possessed of about 42 bighas of agricultural land in village Padarathpur. The family pedigree, which I have recited in the beginning, will show that Beni and Dularey were the original owners of this entire property. Benis branch is represented by Chandrika accused while Dulares branch is represented by Ram Ratan, deceased and the sons of Ram Charan, namely Badaku, Chhotku etc. Admittedly, again revenue litigation was going on between Chandrika, Ram Ratan and Badaku, Chhotku etc. and papers have been placed on the record by the defence to show that this litigation was in progress when Ram Ratan was murdered and it still continuing after Ram Ratans widow Vidyawati has been substituted in his place. Some of these documents have not been formally proved. and papers have been placed on the record by the defence to show that this litigation was in progress when Ram Ratan was murdered and it still continuing after Ram Ratans widow Vidyawati has been substituted in his place. Some of these documents have not been formally proved. But it appears that Chandrika Prasad had started the proceedings and the contest was as regards the shares of the various parties. At one stage of the proceedings, it was even contended that Ram Ratan was not the son of Chhedda. One document paper No. 50-A even shows that the sons of Ram Charan contested Vidyawatis right to represent her husband alleging that she was not the married wife of Ram Ratan. From all these documents as well as the oral evidence and also from the statements of the two accused persons, it is clear that serious revenue litigation was going on be tween the descendants of Beni and Dulare, regarding the agricultural land in village Padarathpur. It is the sworn testimony of Smt. Vidyawati as well as the witnesses Ram Asarey, Motilal and Satya Narain that tired of this litiga tion and bad relations with his family members and apprehension of his own life, Ram Ratan shifted from Padarathpur three years prior to the place of incident. This occurrence and came to Sangaon settled here. He let out his entire 42 big has of land on half Batai and thus started managing the property from Sangaon. Only at times he had his wife used to visit Padarathpur to obtain his share of the grain and also to make local arrangements on the spot. Now this fact, that Ram Ratan had shifted three years prior to his death from Padarathpur to Sangaon alongwith his entire family and had settled here, is not disputed. It is also admitted that after shifting to Samgaon, Ram Ratan had let out his entire land and Batai. It is very natural that this type of action on the part of Ram Ratan, shall not be liked by his litigating Khandanis. They will never like outsiders to carry out cultivation on the family land and I find reason behind Smt. Vidyawatis contention that this also infuriated both Chandrika Prasad as well as the branch of Ram Charan, who wanted to grab Ram Ratans land. They will never like outsiders to carry out cultivation on the family land and I find reason behind Smt. Vidyawatis contention that this also infuriated both Chandrika Prasad as well as the branch of Ram Charan, who wanted to grab Ram Ratans land. It is, however, in evidence that even after Ram Ratan had shifted to Sangaon, Badaku, Chandrika etc. ware regularly visiting him from time to time and staying with him at his house. " 18. After analysis of the entire evidence and circumstances on the record, the learned trial Court passed the order of conviction and sentence as noted above. 19. Feeling aggrieved, both the ac cused have filed this appeal. 20. On the date of hearing fixed in this Court, both the accused, who had been bailed out, absented and this Court can celled their bail bonds on 13-5-96 and or dered the C. J. M. to issue a non-bailable warrant against both of them and after arresting them, he should communicate to the Court. 21. The accused Chandrika Prasad surrendered and is still in Jail. But accused Ram Baran was not available. The C. J. M. concerned is trying to locate him. On 5-8-97, the learned Counsel for the accused, Chandrika Prasad, insisted that the case of Chandrika Prasad be separated from that of Ram Baran and his appeal should be heard. The court acceded to this request and thus, the order dated 19-8-97 was passed by the court that the case of Ram Baran is separated from the case of Chandrika Prasad and appeal of Chandrika Prasad appellant alone should be heard. As and when Ram Baran, appel lant is available, his appeal shall be heard. Thus the appeal of Chandrika Prasad alone has been heard. 22. We have heard the learned Coun sel for the parties and gone through the record. We find that there is absolutely on force in this appeal and it deserves to be dismissed. 23. The finding of the learned trial Court with regard to the motive/enmity between the deceased and the accused, as incorporated in para 17 of this judgment, is sufficient to prove that the accused had a very strong motive for committing the crime. We find that there is absolutely on force in this appeal and it deserves to be dismissed. 23. The finding of the learned trial Court with regard to the motive/enmity between the deceased and the accused, as incorporated in para 17 of this judgment, is sufficient to prove that the accused had a very strong motive for committing the crime. Two fold efforts were made by the accused and their collaterals against Ram Ratan and his wife, the complainant to grab the property and they alleged to show that Ram Ratan was not real son of Sri Cheda and nextly after the death of Ram Ratan, it was alleged that Smt. Vidyawati is no t the legally wedded wife of the deceased Ram Ratan. So efforts were made in such a manner that bitterest possible enmity was bound to occur between the two camps. Unsatisfied with the allegation that Ram Ratan was not the real son of Sri Cheda, his father, the accused persons continued their said stand still more vigorously against the complainant also and alleged that she was not the real wife of Ram Ratan so that the litigation between the two may continue for ages to come and even if the complainant was the first count that her husband was the real son of his father, she would loose unless she further proves that she is the legally wedded wife of the deceased. The accused are acting in a well conceived plan to deprive the deceased as well as the complainant from getting any property, which exclusively belongs to them. The fire of enmity has not been extinguished so far. Rather, it is going on and additional wood is being stoked in the machinery of litigation. So we endorse the finding of the learned trial court that the accused were bitterly inimical towards the deceased as well as his wife and were bent upon to ensure that they do not get their due rather, they are deprived of every thing that was legally due to them. It was sug gested to the complainant in para 5 of the cross- examination that litigations in the consolidation courts between her husband and the accused were pending on the date of the occurrence and in order to do the pairvi, the deceased used to go to Banda Distt. Headquarters. She has denied it. It was sug gested to the complainant in para 5 of the cross- examination that litigations in the consolidation courts between her husband and the accused were pending on the date of the occurrence and in order to do the pairvi, the deceased used to go to Banda Distt. Headquarters. She has denied it. But at the same time, she states, later on, in the same para that her husband used to tell her that he too would start litigation against Chandrika and others. Further, she says that even after coming to village Sangaon, her husband used to go to village Padarath-pur to look after the Batai cultivation and naturally, to collect the yields. Accused Chandrika and Barku wanted to grab the entire property. These accused further dis liked that the deceased had let his property on Batai. Of course, she says that neither she, nor her husband, nor her mother-in-law had filed any F. I. R. against the threats of the accused at the police station. But after coming to the village Sungaon, they had lost this fear that anyone of their col laterals, including the accused, would come to murder Ram Ratan in village Sun gaon also. The reason was genuine. It was the village of her parents and brothers. So naturally, she would feel more secure at village Sangaon. Secondly, in order to put a clock upon the wily intentions, the ac cused continued visiting the deceased in village Sungaon also apparently to per suade Ram Ratan to give his plots to them. The mother-in-law of the complainant used to go to village Padarathpur oc casionally. Therefore, the deceased could not anticipate that his collaterals includ ing the accused would do him to death in village Sangaon also. Hence they were a bit sure of their safety. In the same paragraph, she says at page 5, that 2-3 months after the death of her husband, she had gone to Banda Distt. Headquarters and was sub stituted in the litigation in place of her husband. The litigation which started during the life time of her husband, are still continuing. Hence they were a bit sure of their safety. In the same paragraph, she says at page 5, that 2-3 months after the death of her husband, she had gone to Banda Distt. Headquarters and was sub stituted in the litigation in place of her husband. The litigation which started during the life time of her husband, are still continuing. Thus it is established on the record that there was a bitter enmity between the two camps and the accused had sufficient motive to do away with the deceased in an unusual anticipatory satis faction that once the solitary male member of this family (deceased) was done away with, his widowed mother, aged about 75 years and his young wife, aged about 22-23 years, who did not known much about the litigation and agricultural properties, could be easily get rid of and thus, they would become uncrowned kings of these properties. With these additions on the point of motive, we adopt and put the seal upon the finding on the point of motive as incorporated above. We hold that with this motive, the accused could have committed the murder of the deceased. 24. This case is based upon the direct and ocular testimony of the complainant Smt. Vidyawati. No doubt, she being the complainant, is naturally interested in the success of this case, being wife of the deceased. We are also conscious of the fact that there was an enmity between her hus band and the accused and with their dirty aims, the accused had committed the crime. As she is a very interested witness, as well, we have to scrutinize her evidence with a greater care and caution, keeping these precautions in mind, we proceed to analyse the evidence of P. W. 1 Smt. Vidyawati. This fact should also be kept in mind that she is an illiterate village woman of about 23 years having very little ex perience about this mundane world. Her statement should not be tested on the acid test of a computer. Even otherwise, il literate villagers, specially women, coming from the village suffer from the feeling of uneasiness and loss of acquaintence and familiarity with the atmosphere prevailing in courts, which are specially located at least in Distt. headquarters and big cities. To a great extent, the witnesses are puzzled about the distance, time etc. Even otherwise, il literate villagers, specially women, coming from the village suffer from the feeling of uneasiness and loss of acquaintence and familiarity with the atmosphere prevailing in courts, which are specially located at least in Distt. headquarters and big cities. To a great extent, the witnesses are puzzled about the distance, time etc. So while ex amining the testimony of Smt. Vidyawati, we are keeping these two solitary prin ciples in our mind. 25. Not only this, now the standard of judgment has changed with the multiple observations of the Honble Supreme Court that in villages, where there is a partybandi, only partisan witness will come forward to depose. Those who are totally neutrals, would not take the risk of antagonising the accused. But the most important test as laid down by the Honble Supreme Court first, is to see whether the presence of the witness is naturally provo or established. Secondly, when there is background of enmity, the court has to see as to whether the complainant bad falsely implicated his/her enemies and let the real culprits go scot free. Such cases have come to the courts knowledge that on account of enmity and rancor, some innocent per sons are also added with the real culprits in the F. I. R. But such cases are yet to see the light of the day when real culprits have been intentionally and knowingly let off and only enemies have been substituted and surrogated for them. 26. The complainant was not going to gain anything by implicating the accused and letting off the real culprits. After all, why should she have a soft corner for the real culprits. There cannot be any rational explanation for that. Therefore, in this case, it appears more probable and plausible that the accused have been impli cated simply because they had committed the murder of the deceased and not on account of the fact that they being col laterals were bitterly inimical to her hus band. Not only this, if the complainant wanted to implicate false persons, she could have implicated the entire members of her husbands family, who are on a litigating terms with her and once all of them are lodged in Jail, she would be in a better position to manage her property in Padarathpur village. Being a lady, she had no intention nor capability to do that. Being a lady, she had no intention nor capability to do that. So the only normal course open to her was to implicate the accused only because they had committed the murder. Hence this probability is totally ruled out that she has falsely implicated the accused on account of enmity. 27. Now, we have to keep in mind that this is an incident of mid-night, which took place in the inner house of the com plainant. This unfortunate family had only three members, the husband and wife and the mother of the deceased, who was sleep ing towards the west of the Kothari. This is a case of a poor family. The house is mostly made of huts, They do not have any electric light and only Chimnies (Dibbi) could be used by them as a source of light. Not only this, it appears that there were only two costs in the family one was occupied by the mother-in-law of the complainant and the other was occupied by the husband and wife. They were young people. There was nothing unusual in their sleeping together on the same cot, specially when it was a little away from and not visible from the place, where the aged mother-in-law was sleeping. At that juncture, since the inci dent took place in the bed room, only the wife and none else could be a witness of murder of her husband. Her presence at the place and time, cannot be disputed at all. The Dibbi was two paces away from the cot of this couple. It was a moon-lit night. The culprits were known from before. Since the husband and wife were sleeping together on the same cot, it was clear that as and when the accused and the miscreants arrived, an inkling would be available to the couple to get up. Nay, the accused and the miscreants came very close to the complainant and she had ample opportunity to identify them, spe cially the two appellants. It has not been even suggested that the lady was sleeping somewhere else in the fateful night. There fore, she becomes the most natural witness and also interested one in the success of this prosecution case. As she had iden tified the real culprits, she would not sub stitute them by the inimical collaterals, including the accused. It has not been even suggested that the lady was sleeping somewhere else in the fateful night. There fore, she becomes the most natural witness and also interested one in the success of this prosecution case. As she had iden tified the real culprits, she would not sub stitute them by the inimical collaterals, including the accused. Hence although she is a partisan witness, all the same she is a natural witness. In the statement to this witness, P. W. 1, it was not suggested that she was not available in that night at the place of the murder. As observed earlier, looking to the topographical position as shown by the I. O. in the site-plan, the complainant had every and absolutely clinching opportunity to identify the real culprits of the murder of her husband. Hence her testimony becomes all the more acceptable. She further admits in para 6, at page 5 that all the accused have exposed their faces by keeping them open. First it was Ram Baran, who attacked her. She was trying to get up but up but she could not. Meanwhile, her husband was fired upon by Ram Baran and Chandrika. She continued sitting on the same cot so long as the miscreants were inside their house. The first shot was fired upon the deceased by Chandrika Prasad, appellant and the second and third shots were repeated by them upon her husband. How many fires were shot, is not contained in the state ment under Section 161, Cr. P. C. or in the F. I. R. This way a very strong attack was made by the learned Counsel in order to make her evidence unacceptable. But this approach is not correct. The F. I. R. is not supposed to an encyclopaedia of all the facts, which could be put in the cross-ex amination. So is the case with the state ment under Section 161, Cr. P. C. also. 28. Immediately after the accused came out with the help of a ladder, she also came out of her house and continued her crying, inviting the attention of the village people. 29. She is the author of the F. I. R. , which was lodged in the same night, cover ing a distance of 3 miles at 3. 15 a. m. This F. I. R. is, thus very prompt. She had no opportunity to consult, improve and deliberate. 29. She is the author of the F. I. R. , which was lodged in the same night, cover ing a distance of 3 miles at 3. 15 a. m. This F. I. R. is, thus very prompt. She had no opportunity to consult, improve and deliberate. Therefore, it was quite natural that she would give unvarnished had naked truth only in the F. I. R. Another beauty of this F. I. R. is that it contains almost every things, upon which the prosecution case has been built up, namely, date, time and place of occurrence, names of the accused, their weapons, the mode of their entry, the mode of committing the crime etc. After judging the truthfulness on all these points contained in the F. I. R. alongwith the statement given by the complainant, we find that there is no earthly reason to disbelieve her. The learned trial Court was right in holding her to be a fully truthful witness and further holding that she had every opportunity of correctly identify the ac cused in the light of Dibbi. 30. The learned Counsel has argued that the F. I. R. in this case is ante-timed and it was written much after the time as al leged by the prosecution. In raising this argument, the learned Counsel has urged that the F. I. R. in this case had reached the Doctor very late and not alongwith the dead-body. Secondly, in the Pachayat-nama, the distance of the place of occur rence, is written as 3 Kms. whereas, the F. I. R. has given as 3 miles. We think that the Head Constable had noted the dis tance from the chart available in the office. Therefore, he would show what is con tained in the chart, already prepared, decades ago, whereas the I. O. in the Panchayatnama will normally writ the dis tance in Kms. as he is not accustomed to write distance in miles on account of repeated use of Kms. The distance shown in miles has become almost a historic fact and has also become unnatural. At the top of the memory, it is only Km. In these days, the miles have become obsolete and the use of Kms. has become exclusively most prevalent. Hence this minor mistake has to be ignored. 31. The distance shown in miles has become almost a historic fact and has also become unnatural. At the top of the memory, it is only Km. In these days, the miles have become obsolete and the use of Kms. has become exclusively most prevalent. Hence this minor mistake has to be ignored. 31. As regards the papers reaching late in office, for that the reason appears to be given is that in fact, the F. I. Rs copy was not brought by the constable when he brought the dead-body in the police lines. Secondly, there was no opportunity for the Doctor to have met the constable, who brought the dead- body and identified before him. Therefore, the opportunity could not be available when the docu ments were not available in the police lines or with the conductor of the dead-body, simply because he got them later on the thirdly before he started post-mortem ex amination. Therefore, the Doctor has roamed in an area of conjectures and guess only. This cannot be the basis for rejecting the fact that the F. I. R. was correctly registered as the prosecution says. 32 In this background, we have to meet a connected argument that the dead-body was entrusted to the Constable around 6. 30 a. m. on 2-11-79, which had reached in the police lines at 10 a. m. This may be taken as another reason to say that the F. I. R. lodged much late and then ante-times. This argument is equally without any foundation. The author of the FI. R. is the complainant Smt. Vidyawati, P. W. 1 she was not seriously cross-examined on the point that the F. I. R. was not lodged in the same night at about 3. 15 a. m. She has made a categorical statement in para 4 that she got the F. I. R. , scribed in the same night and took the same in the bullock cart at the police station, where it was registered at 3. 15 a. m. On this categorical statement made by the complainant, we find that there is no cross-examination at all. Hence simply in the light of argument, advanced by a very senior learned Counsel, but total ly bereft of legal foundation, the authen ticity of the statement of this lady and the public document prepared at the police station, cannot be lost sight of. 33. Hence simply in the light of argument, advanced by a very senior learned Counsel, but total ly bereft of legal foundation, the authen ticity of the statement of this lady and the public document prepared at the police station, cannot be lost sight of. 33. At this very stage, we may make a reference to the statement of P. W. 5 H. C. Sri O. K. Verma. He says that on 2-11-79 at about 3. 15 a. m. the complainant brought the written F. I. R. which was registered by him and chik report, Exhibit Ka 6 was prepared. At that time, the I. O. Sri U. K. Sachan, P. W. 7 was also present. The lady had injuries on her person. Thereafter, the Chitthi-Majrubi was also prepared in the same night. The only cross-examination contained in para 2, in one sentence, is that it is wrong to say that the F. I. R. was lodged, on his advise. But it was not suggested that it was not lodged at 3. 15 a. m. 34. Not only this, P. W. 7, I. O. Sri U. K. Sachan states in para 1 that the F. I. R. was registered in his presence on 2-11-79 at 3. 15a. m. The chik report, Exhibit Ka 6 also bears his signature. Not only that, he started the investigation immediately at the police station and recorded the state ments of Smt. Vidyawati and Sri Satya Narain. He also saw the injuries on the person of Smt. Vidyawati, complainant and got the Chitthi Majrubi, Exhibit Ka 8 prepared, which too; bears his signature. Thereafter, he went to the spot and started investigation. The only suggestion made to him, in para 2 of the cross-examination, regarding the F. I. R. , is that the F. I. R is that the F. I. R. was prepared on his advice, after seeing the injuries. But it has not been suggested that it was not registered at 3. 15 a. m. Therefore, this halfhearted cross- ex amination, cannot be sufficient to discard the sworn testimony of the I. O. as well as the Head Constable referred to above and we are totally rejecting the argument of the learned Counsel that the F. I. R. was ante-timed and it was prepared after consult Rajendra (A-6) first. 15 a. m. Therefore, this halfhearted cross- ex amination, cannot be sufficient to discard the sworn testimony of the I. O. as well as the Head Constable referred to above and we are totally rejecting the argument of the learned Counsel that the F. I. R. was ante-timed and it was prepared after consult Rajendra (A-6) first. The trial Court awarded him the life imprisonment whereas in an appeal filed by the State the High Court enhanced the sentence of life imprisonment to death. The reason given by the High Court is that some of the accused persons who have been awarded death sentence formed one group which must include A-6 who had played an iden tical role and, therefore, there was no jus tification to award this accused lesser sen tence. With respect we are unable to agree with the reasoning of the High Court as regards the death sentence awarded to A-6. The role attributed to Rajendra as stated by both the eye-witnesses was that he fired from his gun which hit Sandeep whereupon he fell down. Thereafter Prakash (A-8) and Ravinder (A-5) threw him into the smouldering fire. No other role was attributed to A-6 as far as Sandeep is concerned. Dr. S. K. Tewari (P. W. 9) who performed the autopsy on the dead body of Sandeep could not find any pellet in his body. The prosecution also could not col lect the evidence to show that any pellet was recovered from the ashes. The dead-body of Sandeep was totally charred and, therefore, doctor could not find any injury on his dead body. It is in these circumstan ces A-6 could not be bracketed with ac cused persons who have been awarded death sentence. A-6, in our considered view is entitled to a differential treatment for want of conclusive evidence that he had caused fire-arm injuries to Sandeep. We must make it clear that this finding by itself would not absolve A-6 from his culpability in the present crime with the aid of Section 149, IPC as regards other murders. His presence was proved beyond every reasonable doubt at the time of occur rence. He was a member of an unlawful assembly having a common object to com mit the murders in question and in prosecution thereof used his fire arm along with other accused who were armed with fire-arms. His presence was proved beyond every reasonable doubt at the time of occur rence. He was a member of an unlawful assembly having a common object to com mit the murders in question and in prosecution thereof used his fire arm along with other accused who were armed with fire-arms. In view of these proved facts we are of the considered view mat the death sentence awarded to Rajendra (A-6) was not proper and instead he must fall in the group comprising of accused/appel lants who used the fire arms and have been awarded life imprisonment. We according ly convert the death sentence awarded to Rajendra (A-6) to a life imprisonment without upsetting his convictions &n this count as also convictions and sentences on other counts. 35. Not only this, the village Chow-kidar, Ram Prasad had given an affidavit, Exhibit Ka 20, to the effect that the I. O. entrusted the dead-body to him in duly sealed condition, on 2-11-79 for carrying the same to the district headquarters for post-mortem examination. So long as the dead body remained in his custody, its seals were intact. He identified the dead-body before the Doctor. He was not required for cross-examination by the learned counsel for the accused. Therefore, the statement of village Chowkidar Sri Ram Prasad also puts a seal of truth on the prosecution story that the dead-body was taken by him from the spot for post-mortem examina tion, which he identified before the Doc tor. He was not asked to explain as to how the delay was caused in reaching the Distt. headquarters, which is at a distance of about 20 Kms, so late as at 10 p. m. He was not asked as to what vehicle he used for carrying the dead-body and further, at what time it was available ? did he take breakfast, lunch etc. in between or not? did he take some rest during day time or not etc. ? All these questions could have been put to him in the cross-examination and answers elicited from him. But it was not done. Still the learned Counsel has gathered courage and intellectual capability to say that the dead-body reached very late. It is a difficult to believe. It is matter of common knowledge that public or private carriers avoid taking the dead body in their vehicles. But it was not done. Still the learned Counsel has gathered courage and intellectual capability to say that the dead-body reached very late. It is a difficult to believe. It is matter of common knowledge that public or private carriers avoid taking the dead body in their vehicles. Nay they do not want themselves to be involved in the village Partibandi. Hence great difficulty has to be suffered by the police staff in getting a vehicle and bringing the same for carriage of the dead-body up to the police/district headquarter. The nominal wages paid for such carriages, are equivalent to those which were prevalent before Christ and had become to tally ir relevant in the present day inflationary economy of this country. Further, a lot of harassment has to be met at the hands of the police people, who mostly treat and behave with them roughly and at times they do not pay them even the legitimate wages for that. The poor vehicle drivers had to make repeated rounds of the police station. There are several other factors which come in way in arranging vehicle for carriage of the dead-body. Therefore, we cannot say that at about 6. 30 a. m. the dead body was entrusted to the village Chow kidar and he at once started for the Distt. headquarters. 36. Not only this, the Chowkidar is also a human being. He has to take rest, breakfast, lunch etc. as and when available. He has to take bath and also attend the call of nature. Everything has to be done in between the alleged time of departure and alleged time of its receipt at the police lines. Therefore, mechanical approach is not helpful. We accordingly, reject the ar gument advanced by the learned Counsel on this point and agree with the trial courts finding that the F. I. R. in this case was lodged on 2- 11-79 at 3. 15 a. m. and after fulfilling the formalities, the dead-body was entrusted to the village Chow kidar and in his dilly dalling ways, he moves and reaches the police lines so late. There fore, on the basis of these arguments, it is not possible to say that the F. I. R. in this case has been doctored, as it may suit to the prosecution ease and it was not rightly registered at 3. There fore, on the basis of these arguments, it is not possible to say that the F. I. R. in this case has been doctored, as it may suit to the prosecution ease and it was not rightly registered at 3. 15 a. m. in the night of occur rence. We accordingly, endorse the finding of the learned trial Court on this point. 37. Smt. Vidyawati is an injured wit ness also, from the very beginning, she has been saying that she had received fire-arm injuries in her thigh. Her medical examina tion was conducted on 2-ll-79at9a. m. All the injuries on her person were found to be caused by firearm and were simple, except injury No. 1, with regard to which, X-ray was advised. This way, the importance of the statement of this witness has increased manifold and makes her presence quite natural and trustworthy, as she is an in jured witness as well. This way, after examining the case from multi-faces angles, we come to the conclusion that the state ment of Smt. Vidyawati, duly supported by prompt F. I. R. and medical report and by all other documents connected therewith and the fact that she was interrogated by the I. O. soon after the registration of the case, goes to show that she is a trustworthy witness and her solitary statement, which has mostly gone un- cross-examined and un-challenged, is sufficient to record a judgment of conviction without the aid of any other evidence, which has been brought on the record by the prosecution and we, accordingly, hold that Smt. Vidyawatis statement is 100% true and nothing but truth. After ignoring minor tit-bits here and there and total omissions or additions brought in the cross- examina tion, it cannot make any dent in the truth fulness of her version. The result is that the conviction based on her solitary tes timony, is valid in law and is justified too, after examining the same from every angles. 38. Her statement was challenged vis a-vis the medical evidence to show that she was not correctly stating as to from what distance and from which direction, loca tion etc. , the shots were fired at the deceased or upon her. "human memory is treacherous friend. 38. Her statement was challenged vis a-vis the medical evidence to show that she was not correctly stating as to from what distance and from which direction, loca tion etc. , the shots were fired at the deceased or upon her. "human memory is treacherous friend. " The incident took place on 2-11-79 and the statement was recorded about 2 years thereafter, i. e. on 31-1-81 Therefore, some minor and insig nificant variations and contradictions are bound to occur and they should be en couraged too as the human memory can not be equated with a computer or photograph. Another psychological reason is that when the statement is recorded after a considerable lapse of time, the witness starts adding or omitting certain things on the basis of his/her guess. So the court of law has to proceed with the natural surroundings while examining the testimony of such a witness like Smt. Vidyawati. Hence a mechanical test of ex posing her to the medical and ballistic evidence, is not the correct approach. The learned trial Court has rightly rejected it. 39. Although no corroboration is needed from any ocular witness after ex amining Smt. Vidyawati and making ob servations as noted above, yet the prosecu tion has examined some witnesses, who although did not see the occurrence of murder with their own eyes, but they have proved the circumstances, which took place immediately after the murder. The accused were coming out of the southern door of the house and they had to pass through the public passage, which goes from east to west. Thereafter, it is bifur cated-one part goes towards north and the other part goes towards the south. The house of Ram Ashrey, P. W. 2 has been shown by letter No. 7, in the site plan which falls immediately towards the west of the passage, which runs from east to west and then towards the north of the passage, which goes towards south. Ram Ashrey says that he got up after hearing the fire shots and he immediately came out of his house. He saw the four accused coming out of the house of the deceased, including Ram Baran and Chandrika, appellants, who were known to him from before. It was a moon-lit night. Sri Satya Narain had brought with him, a torch, which he had flashed. He saw the four accused coming out of the house of the deceased, including Ram Baran and Chandrika, appellants, who were known to him from before. It was a moon-lit night. Sri Satya Narain had brought with him, a torch, which he had flashed. Not only this, in the cross-ex amination, he says that he firstly saw all the four culprits when they were coming from the place of murder towards the west. Thus the faces of all there culprits were exposed to this witness. Nay, they came closer and closer to him. All of them were facilitating the identification of them at the hands of Ram Ashrey, while coming towards the house. Nay, again they moved towards the south. He saw them from all the angles except the back one. This way, he had sufficient light and opportunity to correct ly identify the culprits. All of them had exposed their faces without any effort to conceal. Thereafter, he we it inside the house and saw the dead-body lying on a cot. He also saw the Dibbi, which was giving adequate light. The only suggestion made to this witness was that he was not telling the truth, which he has denied. It has not been alleged that Ram Ashrey is not a natural witness and he does not have any house there or that he did not get any opportunity to identify the culprits be cause he might have gone to his relations and somewhere else. In absence of such suggestions even when not attempted, his statement goes unchallenged. We find that Ram Ashrey is a natural witness. He has no enmity with the accused. He is totally an independent and natural witness. In the light and opportunity available to him, he could easily identify the culprits. There fore, a strong support can be taken from the statement of Ram Ashrey to further strengthen the testimony of Smt. Vidyawati. We, endorse the findings of the learned trial court that he is a natural witness and has spoken the truth. 40. P. W. 4, Sri Satya Narain has his house towards the east of the house of the complainant. He too got up after hearing the alarm raised by Smt. Vidyawati and fire shots. He came very close to the house of the complainant and saw the accused going out. He flashed his torch. It was a moon-light. 40. P. W. 4, Sri Satya Narain has his house towards the east of the house of the complainant. He too got up after hearing the alarm raised by Smt. Vidyawati and fire shots. He came very close to the house of the complainant and saw the accused going out. He flashed his torch. It was a moon-light. He correctly identified the culprits, including the appellants. Not only this, he took Smt. Vidyawati alongwith the written F. I. R. in the same night to the police station, where the F. I. R. was register and the I. O. started investigation. He had flashed his torch and with the aid of it too, he correctly and unmistakably iden tified the culprits. Immediately, he went inside the house after exit of the miscreants and saw the dead-body of the deceased lying on a cot. The Dibbi was also burning and was giving adequate light. He has described the topography of the place of occurrence, of course, the entire energy7 has been wasted by the learned cross-ex aminer in proving the enmity of this wit ness vis-a-vis the accused and not any at tempt to disprove that he is a natural witness. He has said that all the culprits had their faces opened and exposed. He also learnt that the deceased had enmity with his collaterals and apprehended danger to his life at their hands. He denied the suggestion that the culprits did not visit the house of the complainant, al though no such question was put to the complainant. Only peripheral and half hearted attempt has been made by the learned cross-examiner to lessen the credit worthiness of his testimony. We think, even Sri Staya Narain is a natural and truthful witness and he lends strong sup port to the testimony of the complainant. 41. P. W. 3 Sri Motilal is the real brother of the complainant. He has sup ported the undisputed point that the deceased along with his family members had started living in village Sangaon for about 3 years prior to the incident. In the night of the occurrence, he heard the alarm and fire shots. His house is in the north of the house of the complainant. He came out towards the east of the house and it was a moon-lit night. In the night of the occurrence, he heard the alarm and fire shots. His house is in the north of the house of the complainant. He came out towards the east of the house and it was a moon-lit night. In this light as well as in the light of torch of a Sri Satya Narain, he correctly identified the accused, who were known to him from before. They were having pistols in their hands. One of the unknown culprits was carrying a transistor belonging to the victim. He saw the com plainant standing at the door of the house. Immediately after the accused made their exit, he also went inside the house and saw (sic) a topography of the place of occur rence, existence of Dibbi, blood-stains cloths etc. He also says that there was a bamboo leader, which was entrusted to him by the I. O. of course, he is the real brother of the complainant and is an inter ested witness. But he is also a crime of the F. I. R. , which was prepared in the same night and the complainant took the same to the police station. Therefore, it is quite natural for him to reach the place of occur rence after hearing the alarm of his sister and also the fire shots. So he would naturally come out from his residential house and reach the place of occurrence and in the adequate light, he would identify correctly the known culprits. He also sup ports the factum of motive and enmity, including the litigation between the deceased and the culprits. He says," It is wrong to say that the accused Ram Baran was not known to him from before. But he had visited the house of the complainant about 3-4 times prior to the occurrence. He has supported the complainant and other witnesses regarding the to zoographical position of the place of" occurrence. 42. After taking all the pre-cautions, which should be taken with regard to the partisan witness, we find that the state ment of Sri Motilal is an acceptable piece of evidence and it lends robust support to the statement of the complainant. Thus, from the ocular testimony also, the faclum of murder of the deceased at the hands of the accused is fully established. Thus, from the ocular testimony also, the faclum of murder of the deceased at the hands of the accused is fully established. It is further established that Smt. Vidyawati had received injuries at the hands of the ac cused Ram Baran in the same incident. 43. Several irrelevant omissions and additions in the statement of the com plainant have been brought to our notice. But we are not going to reject the natural and credit-worthy evidence of the PWs rather, we ditto the conclusions and find ings of the learned trial Court. 44. Thus, after a thread-bare analysis of the entire evidence and circumstances on the record, we find that the prosecution has been able to prove its case beyond a shadow of reasonable do not against the appellant Chandrika Prasad. 45. The appeal of Chandrika Prasad has not force. It is, accordingly, dismissed. He is already in jail. Appeal dismissed. .