Order R.N. Sahay, J. This appeal is on behalf of twelve convicted accused persons in Sessions Trial No. 22/81 on the file of 2nd Additional Sessions Judge. West Champaran, Bettiah, who have been sentenced to life term for murder of four persons and sentenced to five years on the charge of arson. The appellants have also been sentenced to pay a fine of Rs.4,000/each. 2. Appellants No.7 Chandra deep Mahto had died during the pendency of this appeal this appeal stands abated. So far appellant 7 is concerned. 3. It would be appropriate first to narrate the events that happened in village Balua Barheya, P.S. Gaunaha in the district of West Champaran on 29-10-1979 in which four persons, namely, Bikram Yadav, Subhash Yadav, Bhukhal Yadav and Darbari Thakur were murdered. First three deceased persons were father brother and nephew of the informant while the fourth deceased was labourer of the informant. Residential house of the family of the informant was set on fire. The occurrence was witnessed by large number of villagers but fear prevented the witnesses in coming forward and depose what they had witnessed. 4. The deceased Bikram Yadav was involved in civil litigation in Bettiah Court which provided motive for the gruesome crime. The most glaring fact of the case is that no report of the occurrence was given at the police station by anybody for almost two days. The law was set in motion by way of complaint addressed to the Superintendent of police by Shambhu Yadav, son of deceased Bikram Yadav on 31-10-1979. The case was instituted on the orders of the Superintendent of Police on 3-11-1979. The complaint disclosed the reasons for not approaching the police that out of fear of the accused persons, who were also hunting for the informant, he could not inform the police and there was no person in the village to inform the police. 5. The complainant charged the appellants for having invaded his residential house with lethal weapons at night and telling his father to leave the village since he was non-Tharis. The village was prominently inhabited by Thad Tribals. The appellants alleged to have threatended the deceased Bikram Yadav that he would not be allowed to till his land. Bikrarn Yadav did not yield to the, threat and therefore, one and three other persons, who were in the house at the time were murdered. The village was prominently inhabited by Thad Tribals. The appellants alleged to have threatended the deceased Bikram Yadav that he would not be allowed to till his land. Bikrarn Yadav did not yield to the, threat and therefore, one and three other persons, who were in the house at the time were murdered. This happened in presence of Nathuni Yadav (P.W.2). Sadique Mian (P.W.4) Jagdish Yadav (P.W.7), Shahid Mian) (P.W.5) and others Buni Hajra (P.W.1) had seen the house of Bikram Yadav burning in the night rest of his evidence is hearsay 6. Nathuni Yadav (P.W.2) has vaguely stated that vaguely persons had assembled at the Dsrwaja of Bikram Yadav. They were telling him to leave the village. This witness has named Some of the accused persons. He said that the deceased persons were assaulted by the mob. 7. Sadique Mian (P.W.4) was returning from the market in the night. On the way, he passed through the village and caw marpit in the house of Bikram and the house was burning. According to him, the whole village was engaged in assaulting Bikram, Subhash and two small children. He identified appellant No.7 (now dead), Bikram Mahto (Appellant No.4) Jagdeo Mahto, Kuar Mahto and Loha. 8. Akbar Mian (P.W.5) had seen Bikram Yadav, Subhash Yadav, Bhukhal Yadav and Darbari Thakur being assaulted by lathi. He identified sixteen persons including the appellants. 9. Shahid Mian (P.W.6) saw the house of Bikram Yadav burning. 18 to 20 persons, were assembled in front of the house of Bikram Yadav with lathi. He could not identify any of the assailants. 10. Jagdish Yadav (P.W.7) was returning with Shahid Mian (P.W.6) and saw the deceased persons being assaulted by a mob. He identified seven of the appellants, 11. So far no witness stated having seen the dead bodies of four persons murdered in the occurrence. Birendra Kishore Kali (P.W.8) simply stated that he had seen the dead bodies of Bikram Yadav and three others but did not mention the names of three other persons. He has not even said as to whether the dead bodies were found. This witness is an inquest witness. 12. The informant Shambhu Yadav after submitting written complaint to the Superintendent of Police at Bettiah returned to his village. There be learnt that four dead bodies were had been taken to Bettiab. He has not even said as to whether the dead bodies were found. This witness is an inquest witness. 12. The informant Shambhu Yadav after submitting written complaint to the Superintendent of Police at Bettiah returned to his village. There be learnt that four dead bodies were had been taken to Bettiab. He rushed to Bettiah Hospital and after post-mortem the dead bodies were handed over to him. The informant in his evidence has stated that village Balua Barheya was mostly dominated by people of Tharu caste. They were opposed to non-Tharu living and cultivating land in that village. He was informed about the occurrence in village Mathia. His family members resided at the house at Balua Barheya where he had culturable land. On hearing the news of the occurrence he went to Bettiah immediately, met [he Superintendent of Police on 31-10-1979 and filed written complaint. There was delay of two days. His explanation that out of fear he could not go to the police station, can hardly be accepted. He waited for the Superintendent of Police, who was away from the Station. The informant did not go to another police officer. There is no cogent explanation for the delay. His father and three others were murdered and he received information in the village but made no effort to contact co villagers or any police officer. 13 Now, I turn to the post mortem report. Dr. P.N. Gupta (P.W.9) held post mortem examination on the dead body of Bhukhal Yadav and found following injuries : (i) One lacerated injury 1-1/4" x 1/2" x 1/2" right chest. (ii) (a) Lacerated injury 1-1/2" x 1/2 x scalp deep on the back of the head. (b) Lacerated wound 2-1/2" x 1/2" scalp deep on the back of the head about 1-1/2" below injury No. (ii) (a). (iii) Swelling 6-1/2" x 4-1/2" on the right side of chest. On dissection the doctor found all the ribes in front on the left side of chest from third to seventh broken. He further found plural cavity full of un-clotted blood and dotted blood on its left side. Lungs were lacerated at several places corresponding to the fracture. Post-mortem examination was held on 1.11.1979 when the decomposition had started in the viscera. Injuries were ante-mortem caused by hard and blunt substance. According to the doctor the injuries were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Lungs were lacerated at several places corresponding to the fracture. Post-mortem examination was held on 1.11.1979 when the decomposition had started in the viscera. Injuries were ante-mortem caused by hard and blunt substance. According to the doctor the injuries were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. 14. Dr. P.N. Gupta (PW 9) held postmortem examination on the dead body of Bikram Yadav on 1.11.1979 and found following injuries ;- (i) Cranium crushed and disfigured, all its bone being broken. (ii) All the ribes from 3rd to 6th in front of the chest fractured. (iii) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x 1/2'' scalp deep on the forehead. (iv) Lacerated injury 1/4" x 1/2" x 1/4" on upper lip. On dissection following injuries were found :- (i) Concerning memberane and the brain material lacerated and disfigured. (ii) Pluree and the lung surfaces of both sides lacerated and the plural cavity full of un-clotted blood and 3rd to 6th ribes broken. The injuries were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature and the injuries were caused by hard and blunt substances. 15. Dr. R.P. Aarawal (PW 11) held autopsy on the dead body of Subhash Yadav and found following injuries :- (i) Lacerated wound 6" x 4" x bone deep on the front portion of scalp (ii) Lacerated wound 2" x 1" x muse e deep near right eye. (iii) Lacerated wound 3" x 2" x muscle deep on right chick and mouth. (iv) Bruise 7" x 3" on front of chest. (v) Bruise 2-1/2" x1" left chest. (vi) Bruise 3" x 2" on right chest. On dissection P.W. 11 found the skull bone shattered into pieces and the brain wholly lacerated and liquified. The left clavicle was plumated. The 3rd to 5th ribes were found fractured. The injuries were caused by hard and blunt substance. 16. Dr. Bharat Kumar Rai (PW 12) held autopsy on the dead body of deceased Darbari Thakur and found following injuries; (i) One lacerated wound 2-1/2" x 1/2" Xi skin deep. (ii) One bruise on right side of waist 1-1/2" x 1/2". (iii) Bruise 2" x 1/2" on right hip. (iv) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x 1/2" x skin deep on left side of scalp. (ii) One bruise on right side of waist 1-1/2" x 1/2". (iii) Bruise 2" x 1/2" on right hip. (iv) Lacerated wound 1-1/2" x 1/2" x skin deep on left side of scalp. On dissection scalp bone was found fractured in several pieces and brain matter badly lacerated 2nd to 7th ribes on the right side and 3rd to 7th on the left side were found fractured. Chest cavity was full of blood. Lungs were lacerated on both sides. 17. It is apparent from the injuries found on all the four deceased persons that all of them were assaulted by hard and blunt substance. It is, therefore, apparent that several persons must have participated in the assault. 18. The Investigating Officer was not examined by the prosecution. Gurunandan Sharma posted as A.S.I. at Gaunaha Police station was examined as court witness under Section 311 Cr. P.C. According to him, on 3.11.1979 he received written complaint of Shambhu Yadav from the Superintendent of Police, Bettiah, on the basis of which Gaunaha P.S. Case No.1 of 1979 was registered against the accused persons. It is surprising that four persons were murdered in brutal manner, still no information was received at the police station for three days. This A.S.I. reached the site of the occurrence on 4.11.1979 and found the house of the informant burnt. 50 yards away from the house of the informant, there was field of Jagdeo Mahto. He found trial of blood on the ground. He found blood in another field also. He also found trampling mark in the field. Most startling fact is that this police officer is silent about the dead bodies. 19. To sum up, I have no doubt that four persons were brutally murdered for no apparent reason. One of the prosecution witness has stated that the entire villagers were involved in the murder of four persons. Prosecution evidence is that the villagers were mostly of Tharu Tribal and were not prepared to tolerate non-Tharus. It may be a probable motive but something serious must have happened on that day and in the night four persons were murdered in the house and the house of the informant was set on fire. Significant aspect of the case is that no report of the occurrence reached the police station for three days. There were several eye-witnesses but none agreed to inform the police. Significant aspect of the case is that no report of the occurrence reached the police station for three days. There were several eye-witnesses but none agreed to inform the police. There is no evidence as to how the dead bodies of the deceased were taken to Bettiah. Whole affairs appear to be shrouded in deep mystery. Some of the eye-witnesses have given description of the occurrence and some are declared hostile. Their evidence not all up to mark and consistent. 20. It is not that no information was given to the police. A First Information Report was lodged by accused Manraj Mahto being Gaunaha P.S. Case No.6 (10) 79. According to the First Information Report of Gaunaha P.S. Case No. 6 (10) 79, the deceased persons had made preparation for committing dacoity and four persons were killed by the mob. This plea was found to be false by the Trial Court. Learned trial Judge, no doubt, taken pains to consider all aspect of the matter but there are many infirmities in the case and it is difficult to accept the finding of the Trial Court. 21. There is force in the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants that there were several eye-witnesses according to the prosecution case but it is surprising that no information was given to the police. The informant waited for ho days and then lodged the case. The evidence of the eye-witnesses is not clear and cogent but vague and halfhearted. 22. The witnesses, who claimed to have seen the occurrence are Nathuni Yadav (P.W.) 2), Sadique Mian (P.W. 4), Akbar Mian (P.W.5), Shabid Mian (P.W.6) and Jagdish Yadav (P.W.7). P.W.2 in para- 2 of his evidence admitted that he did not see anyone assaulting. This witness also did not recognise the persons assaulting. Sadique Mian (P.W.4) was disbelieved by the Trial Court as is evident from para-16 of the judgment in which the Trial Court found that this witness had not seen the occurrence. Akbar Mian (P.W.5) has also not given any cogent evidence. He said that he witnessed the occurrence from a distance of 15 katha. He was not able to recollect the names of the appellants after such a long time. Shahid Mian (P.W.6) has also not said anything about the nature of the offence except that 18 to 20 persons were standing but he could not identify the persons assaulting. He said that he witnessed the occurrence from a distance of 15 katha. He was not able to recollect the names of the appellants after such a long time. Shahid Mian (P.W.6) has also not said anything about the nature of the offence except that 18 to 20 persons were standing but he could not identify the persons assaulting. Jagdish Yadav (P.W.7) in para-7 of his evidence bas stated that hundreds of persons were present at the place of occurrence whereas other witnesses have stated 18 to 20 persons. It bas been argued by the learned Counsel for the appellants that all of the eye witnesses are chance witnesses. They are living in that village. None of them bad identified any of the accused persons much less these appellants. 23. Learned Counsel for the appellants rightly contended that the occurrence took place in 1979 and the evidence of the case was taken after eight years and after such a long gap it was quite possible that these witnesses had suffered loss of memory which some witnesses have themselves admitted. 24. For the reasons stated above, it is difficult to sustain the judgment of the Trial Court convicting the appellants on inconsistent and infirm evidence as noticed earlied. Besides such serious crime was not properly investigated. Some of the witnesses must have said about the real occurrence. The Superintendent of Police did not take interest. When the informant went to him and filed written complaint regarding murder of four person it was the duty of the Superintendent of Police: to immediately go to the spot or to depute any senior police officer. The complaint itself was received on the next day. Prosecution case is not fully unfolded. No witness bas stated about the dead bodies. There ill no evidence how the dead bodies were taken to Bettiah Hospital. 25. In the result, this appeal must succeed and is accordingly allowed the conviction of the appellants is set aside and they are acquitted of the charges giving them benefit of doubt. All the appellants, except appellant No. 7 Chandradeep Mahto, are in custody. Appellant No.7 had died during the pendency of this appeal. This appeal stands abates in respect of appellant No.1 Other appellant s are directed to be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. Appeal Allowed.