( 1 ) THESE two appeals have been preferred by the accused-appellants Kishan Lal, Ved Ram and Daya Shanker against their conviction for the offence under Section 302/34, I. P. C. and the sentence of life imprisonment awarded to them by Sri O. N. Asthana, the then IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Manipuri in S. T. No. 599 of 1979. Daya Shanker accused-appellant of Criminal Appeal No. 1184 of 1980 has died and consequently that appeal has abated on 10-2-1998. Ved Ram accused-appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 759 of 1980 has also died and the present appeal has consequently abated to his extent on 10-2-1998. In the result, there remains only the Crl. Appeal No. 759 of 1980 to the extent of Kishan Lal accused-appellant. ( 2 ) WE have heard parties counsel. ( 3 ) THE deceased in this case was Ram Chandra. He, Shyam Lal informant and Ram Das were real brothers inter se. Kishan Lal accused-appellant and the co-accused Ved Ram and Daya Shanker were real brothers inter se being sons of Ganga Ram. All of them were Jatav by caste. One Sita Ram is maternal uncle of Daya Shanker and other accused-appellant i. e. to say Sita Ram was the brother of the mother of Daya Shanker and others. Kishan Lal accused-appellant and the co-accused Ved Ram and Daya Shanker were real brothers inter se being sons of Ganga Ram. All of them were Jatav by caste. One Sita Ram is maternal uncle of Daya Shanker and other accused-appellant i. e. to say Sita Ram was the brother of the mother of Daya Shanker and others. ( 4 ) THE prosecution story was that Daya Shanker accused-appellant has developed illicit relations with the wife of Sita Ram which relation continued for 3-4- years prior to the date of occurrence and as far back as one month from the date of occurrence, Daya Shanker had started keeping with himself the said wife of Sita Ram as his mistress and she lived at his house for 10-12 days, whereafter, the mother of Daya Shanker accused-appellant sent that woman to her parents place Pundri as she had disliked the coming of that woman, that the said woman sent mass-age to Shyam Lal informant calling upon him to meet her in Mainpuri, whereupon, he went to Mainpuri and met her and she told him that her husband was not keeping him and that he (informant) should pursuade the mother of Daya Shanker accused-appellant to keep her, whereupon, he met the mother of Daya Shanker accused-appellant but she did not agree, that thereupon, Ram Chandra accused-appellant persuaded his younger brother Ram Das to keep this woman as his own wife and consequently, this woman started living with Ram Das as his wife at the house of the informant Shyam Lal. The prosecution story further is that 2 days prior to the present occurrence, all the three accused-appellant had threatened Ram Chandra deceased to see him. The present occurrence took place on 16-10-1979 at 7. 00 p. m. The prosecution claim that at that time, Ram Chandra deceased was repairing the sides of a water channel (Barha) near the Usar of Narendra Singh Pradhan in order to carry water to the paddy field of the family while Shyam Lal informant was present in the eastern paddy field of the family waiting arrival of water for irrigation, that at that time, Ramesh Chandra deceased cried, "chaliyo BHAYEE MUJHEY KISHAN LAL NE PAKAR LIYA HAI. ", whereupon the informant Deen Dayal and Akhter ran towards the deceased and Deen Dayal witness flashed his torch and Mathura Prasad Mishra who was returning from Mainpuri to his own village also flashed his torch and rushed to the spot and saw that Kishan Lal accused-appellant was holding Ram Chandra deceased and exhorted, "is SALEY KO JAN SEY MAR DO," and that Ved Ram accused-appellant inflicted injuries on the body of the deceased with knife while Daya Shanker accused-appellant assaulted him and inflicted injuries with Gandasa, that due to the injury, Ram Chandra deceased fell down to the ground and the assailants ran away and when the informant and the witnesses reached near the deceased he died instantaneously at the spot itself. ( 5 ) THE first information report of this case was lodged by Shyam Lal informant at the police station Bhogaon at 10. 30 p. m. , the distance of the police station being 7 miles. The usual check report was prepared and a case of murder was registered against all the three accused-appellants. The inquest proceedings were taken and the deceased was dispatched for post mortem and the usual investigation followed concluding in the submission of charge-sheet. ( 6 ) THE post mortem on the dead body of the deceased Ram Chandra was performed by doctor J. P. Gupta, P. W. 6 on 17-10-1979 at 4. 30 p. m. He found the following ante mortem injuries on the body of the deceased; ANTE MORTEM INJURIES1. Lacerated wound 5 c. m. x 1. 5 c. m. bone deep starting from midline of forehead reaching to the upper end of Rt. Ear. 2 c. m. above the Rt. Eyebrow, underneath bone fractured. 2. Lacerated wound 6 c. m. x 1 c. m. x bone deep over the Rt. side of face along the mandible, underneath bone fractured. 3. Lacerated wound 6 c. m. x 0. 5 c. m. muscle deep over the Rt. Side of chin, 0. 5 c. m. below the inj. No. 2. 4. Incised wound 4 c. m. x 0. 5 c. m. x muscle deep over the lower chin Rt. side 2. 5 c. m. below injury No. 3. 5. Incised wound 3 c. m. x 1 c. m. x muscle deep over the Rt. side of neck 2 c. m. below the Rt. ear. 6. Lacerated wound 4 c. m. x 0. 5 c. m. x muscle deep over the lower chin Rt. side 2. 5 c. m. below injury No. 3. 5. Incised wound 3 c. m. x 1 c. m. x muscle deep over the Rt. side of neck 2 c. m. below the Rt. ear. 6. Lacerated wound 4 c. m. x 0. 2 c. m. x skin deep over the outer surface of Rt. leg 12 c. m. below the Rt. knee. 7. 2 Lacerated wounds in an area of 12 c. m. x 3 c. m. over the outer surface of Rt. leg, 2. 5 c. m. x 0. 5 c. m. skin deep 1. 5 c. m. x 0. 5 c. m. , 8 c. m. apart, 10 c. m. below the Lt. knee. 8. INCISED wound 3 c. m. x 1. 5 c. m. x bone deep over the posterior surface of neck starting, from midline to the lower end of Rt. Ear, 5 c. m. above cervical U. Spin 7. 9. TWO abrasions in one area of 1 c. m. x 8 c. m. over the back of Rt. shoulder. 7 c. m. x 5 c. m. x 1. 5 c. m. x 0. 5 c. m. 10. TWO abrasions in an area of 7 c. m. x 5 c. m. over the Rt. side of back 5 c. m. below the Inf. angle of the Rt. scapula, 3 c. m. x 1. 5 c. m. , 2. 5 c. m. x 1 c. m. 11. ONE abrasion 5 c. m. x 0. 5 c. m. over the post surface of Rt. Elbow. 12. ONE abrasion 3 c. m. x 1. 5 c. m. over the post surface of Lt. thigh. 15 c. m. above the Lt. knee. " Internal examination revealed fracture on right frontal and parietal bones besides the fractures noted in the ante mortem injuries. The doctor has given his considered opinion that ante mortem injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 could be caused by knife. He also stated that though Gandasa is heavy sharp cutting weapon if the blade of a Gandasa had become blunt and rusted then the wounds caused by it would be lacerated. He further stated that the injuries Nos. 9 to 12 could be caused by fall. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 could be caused by knife. He also stated that though Gandasa is heavy sharp cutting weapon if the blade of a Gandasa had become blunt and rusted then the wounds caused by it would be lacerated. He further stated that the injuries Nos. 9 to 12 could be caused by fall. ( 7 ) AT the trial, the ocular evidence was given by Shyam Lal informant P. W. 2, Deen Dayal P. W. 4 and Mathura Prasad P. W. 5. Deen Dayal P. W. 4 was hostile in as much as he claimed that he could not identify the assailants and that neither he nor Akhter had any torch with them. However, he admitted his presence at the spot and also testified, to the alarm of the deceased and the reaching of the witnesses including himself to the spot and the running away of the assailants after committing the offence. On the point of motive, he testfied to the living of the wife of Sita Ram with Ram Das in the days of offence and also claimed that the accused persons felt enmity towards deceased. ( 8 ) SHYAM Lal informant P. W. 2 and Mathura Prasad P. W. 5 both supported the prosecution case in full and nominated all the accused-appellants as the culprits and the learned Sessions Judge has believed the prosecution evidence and so awarded the conviction and sentence as aforesaid. ( 9 ) THE main argument of the learned counsel for the present accused-appellant Kishan Lal is that the roles of assault with weapons have been imputed only to Daya Shankar and Ved Ram accused-appellants and that the injuries on the body of the deceased correspond only to the weapon of Daya Shanker and Ved Ram co-accused and that the present accused-appellant has been falsely implicated in this case due to enmity simply because he also happened to be the brother of Daya Shanker and Ved Ram co-accused. It has been argued that false implication of an innocent person along with the real culprit is common in our country and that consequently prosecution evidence should be discarded as regards Kishan Lal accused-appellant and he should be given the benefit of doubt. The learned A. G. A. has on the other hand supported the prosecution case as against this accused-appellant. The learned A. G. A. has on the other hand supported the prosecution case as against this accused-appellant. It has been mentioned that he had played an active role in the occurrence by not only exhorting but also grasping the victim to facilitate his murder. He also pointed out that there was motive established on record for all the 3 accused-appellant to commit the murder of the deceased. ( 10 ) WE have considered the submissions of the parties counsel. There are some prominent circumstances in this case which tends to go in favour of the accused-appellant. ( 11 ) WE have already noted the evidence of Deen Dayal P. W. 4 who was hostile, regarding the identity of the assailants. Regarding Mathura Prasad, P. W. 5 it has been pointed out firstly that he was only a chance witness who claimed to be returning from Mainpuri to his own village after shopping and on his own showing, his statement was recorded by the investigating officer under S. 161, Cr. P. C. 15 to 20 days after the occurrence and argued that so there essentially remained the testimony of only, the informant. His testimony is supported as against Daya Shanker and Ved Ram co-accused-appellants by the post mortem evidence and also by their nomination in the first information report which appears to be reasonably prompt in this case. However, as regards Kishan Lal present accused-appellant, the position is that though he is said to be participating in the occurrence in furtherance of the common intention of all the 3 of them, he is not alleged to be carrying any weapon whatsoever. He is also not alleged to have assaulted the deceased in any manner. In the first information report, the allegation was no doubt made that while Ved Ram was assaulting the deceased with knife, by mistake Kishan Lal accused-appellant had also received injuries on his body by knife. This claim was made by the informant in his testimony also at the trial of the case. He has stated therein that the knife has struck on the back of Kishan Lal accused-appellant and he had seen blood coming out from the back of Kishan Lal accused-appellant at the time of occurrence. This claim was made by the informant in his testimony also at the trial of the case. He has stated therein that the knife has struck on the back of Kishan Lal accused-appellant and he had seen blood coming out from the back of Kishan Lal accused-appellant at the time of occurrence. It is true that this accused-appellant was not arrested at the spot but had surrendered in the court on 29-10-1979 (vide surrender application Paper No. 17/2b of the committing court record) that means 13 days after the date of occurrence. However, the prosecution has not placed on record any medical examination of this accused-appellant at the time of his admission to jail on 29-10-1979. In the ordinary course, injuries, if any present on the body of accused are recorded in jail records at the time of his admission to jail. The prosecution is completely silent on this aspect. The investigating officer has been asked about it in his cross-examination. He stated that he had interrogated all the 3 accused by going to jail but he did not try to see whether Kishan Lal accused-appellant had any injury on his body. He admitted that in the first information report, it has been recorded that Kishan Lal accused-appellant has received injuries but he forgot to check the injuries on the body of Kishan Lal. ( 12 ) CONSIDERING all the circumstances, the possibility of false implication of this accused-appellant along with the real culprits namely Ved Ram and Daya Shanker cannot be ruled out. So by way of abundant precaution, benefit of doubt may properly be given to the present accused-appellant Kishan Lal. ( 13 ) FOR the reasons aforesaid, the appeal of Kishan Lal accused-appellant is allowed. His conviction for the offence under S. 302/34, I. P. C. and the sentence therefor are set aside and he is acquitted of the offence. He is in jail. He shall be released forthwith unless wanted in some other case. ( 14 ) LET a copy of this judgment be sent to the Sessions Judge concerned for information and compliance. Compliance report be submitted to this Court within one month from today. ( 15 ) THE appeal has already been abated to the extend of Ved Ram accused-appellant on 10-2-1998 consequent upon his death. The appeal of Daya Shanker accused-appellant has also abated. Appeal allowed. .