( 1 ) THE appellant Jai veer Singh was convicted by Sri umeshwar Pandey. the then IV Additional Sessions judge, ghaziabad under Section 302 I. P. C. by judgement and order dated 21. 8. 1984 passed in S. T. No. 298 of 1983. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. Aggrieved, he has preferred this appeal. ( 2 ) THE incident took place in between the night of 16th and 17th July, 1983 sometime after about midnight in village Nangla moosa, P. S. Modinagar, District- Ghaziabad. The victim of the felony was Smt. Gajendra wife of Kamal Singh, P. W. 4 resident of the same village. The prosecution case as per the F. I. R. and the evidence was that in between the fateful night Smt. Gajendra alone with her three children was sleeping in her courtyard. Her husband kamal Singh P. W. 4 had gone to village Rajpura to see his ailing brother-in-law. On one cot Smt. Gajendra was sleeping with her youngest child whereas her daughter Km. Yashoda, P. W. I, and son umang alias Billu. P. W. 2 were sleeping on two different cots nearby, After about midnight Km. Yashoda , P. W. I heard the voice of her mother and awoke. She saw the accused Jai Veer Singh assaulting her mother with some weapon which she could not recognise. Her brother umang alias Billu , P. W. 2also awoke at the same time and saw the occurrence. On alarm being raised by them their uncle Raj veer Singh P. W. 5. and grandmother arrived at the spot. On receiving the blows of assault the victim could not get up from the cot and became unconscious. She was taken to Modinagar on a cart belonging to Ved Pal to the residence of her husbands elder brother Harpal Singh, P. W. S. Km. Yashoda, P. W. I along with her uncle Harpal Singh. P. W. S. then went to the Police Station modinagar. She dictated the F. I. R. to her uncle Harpal and signed the same. On the basis of the F. I. R. Ex. Ka-l,a case under Section 308 I. P. C. was registered at the Police Station on 17. 7. 1983 at 2 a. M. the victim had also been taken to the Police Station. She was to govindpuri primary Health Centre for medical examination. On the basis of the F. I. R. Ex. Ka-l,a case under Section 308 I. P. C. was registered at the Police Station on 17. 7. 1983 at 2 a. M. the victim had also been taken to the Police Station. She was to govindpuri primary Health Centre for medical examination. Her condition being serious she was referred from Primary Health Centre govindpuri to District Hospital, Ghaziabad. ON being taken to m. M. G. Hospital, Ghaziabad her injuries were examined by Dr. M. L. Parekh at 3. 20 A. M. who found as many as four incised wounds and three lacerated wounds on her person. All the Injuries were fresh. Soon thereafter she died. The case was converted from section 308 to Section 304 I. P. C. ( 3 ) ON information being sent from the hospital to the police Station Kotwali Ghaziabad, S. I. Mani Raj Singh, P. W. 9. was sent to the hospital to prepare inquest report and other relevant papers. After doing the needful he handed over the dead body to constable anant Ram, P. W. 7 and Rajendra Singh to carry it for post -mortem. The post-mortem was conducted by Dr. S. K. Bhagwat, p. W. 6 on 17. 7. 1983 at 4. 30 P. M. He found the following antemortem injuries on her person:- 1. Incised wound with tapering end and skin deep at lower end 7cm. X I cm (middle) bone deep in the centre over left temporal region extending from eye brow to ear. 2. Incised wound 8. Cm. X 2cm. x bone deep entry left mendibular bone and lower jaw, Bone and teeth coming out from the wound on the upper cheek extending from below lower lip. 3. Incised wound 12cmx 2cm x muscle deep from right half of chin to the lateral side of neck just below injury no. 2. 4. Incised wound 11 cm x 3 cm x muscle deep just below injury no. 3 cutting neck muscle. Larynx and left regular vein on neck vein. 5. Stab wound 3 cm. x 1cm x oval at one end x 2 cm deep over left part deltoid muscle. 6. Lacerated wound 9 cmx 3cm x skin deep on upper and left arm. 7. Lacerated wound 15 cm. x 4cm. x muscle deep over 2/3 part of left arm. Extending from elbow joint. 5. Stab wound 3 cm. x 1cm x oval at one end x 2 cm deep over left part deltoid muscle. 6. Lacerated wound 9 cmx 3cm x skin deep on upper and left arm. 7. Lacerated wound 15 cm. x 4cm. x muscle deep over 2/3 part of left arm. Extending from elbow joint. The deceased was aged about 35 years and about Vz day had passed since she died. The death had occurred due to shock and haemorrhage caused by ante-mortem injuries. The case was further converted from Section 304 to 302 I. P. C. . The investigation followed as usual where after a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused- appellant under Section 302 I. P. C. . After committal he was tried for the offence punishable under Section 302 I. P. C. At the trial the prosecution examined ten witnesses , out of whom Km. Yashoda, P. W. 1 and Umang alias Billu, P. W. 2 were the eye witnesses of the occurrence. Rajveer Singh, P. W. 5 was examined as the person who had seen the accused -appellant running from the spot. Harpal Singh, P. W. . 3. is the elder brother of the husband of the deceased who had scribed the F. I. R. Kamal Singh, P. W. 4 is the husband of the deceased. Drs. K. Bhagwat, P. W. 6. had conducted the post-mortem over the dead body of the deceased. S. I Amar Singh p. W. 10 was the Investigating Officer and rest were examined as formal witnesses. No. witness was examined by the accused -appellant in defence. ( 4 ) LEARNED Additional Sessions judge , believed the testimony of two child witness namely, Km. Yashoda P. W. I. AND umang alias Billu, P. W. 2. He, however, discarded the testimony of raj veer Singh , P. W. 5. and in our opinion rightly, for the reason that he was examined by the Investigating Officer after sufficient delay on 5. 8. 1983 and his name was also not there in the F. I. R. It may also be recalled that he was not an eyewitness of the actual occurrence. Any way, placing reliance on the testimony of two child witnesses the learned Additional Sessions Judge found the guilt of the accused-appellant to be proved. He, accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as stated in the opening paragraph of the judgement. Any way, placing reliance on the testimony of two child witnesses the learned Additional Sessions Judge found the guilt of the accused-appellant to be proved. He, accordingly, convicted and sentenced him as stated in the opening paragraph of the judgement. The accused -appellant pleaded not guilty and his case as per his statement under section 313 Cr. P. C. was that the husband of the deceased was the manager of Yuvak Mangal Dal of the village and he had committed misappropriation of some money belonging to the village school which was objected to by him and for this reason he came to be falsely implicated. We have heard Sri Samit Gopal learned counsel for the appellant and learned A. G. A from the side of the State. We have also carefully gone through the evidence on record. We are of the opinion that the prosecution case suffers from inherent weaknesses and element of doubt persists as to the guilt of the accused -appellant. We intend to state the reason for our this conviction in the succeeding discussion. ( 5 ) IN the first instance, it is worthy of notice that there could hardly be any motive on the part of accused -appellant to commit the murder of the lady in question. He had no enmity with her whatsoever. There was no previous background either involving the two in any manner. No doubt Kamal Singh , P. W. 4.-husband of the lady and the accused-appellant have come up with the case of enmity between them. The reason assigned by the accused- appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C. was that kamal Singh, p. W. 4 had misappropriated certain funds of the village school and he had objected to it. According to him, it was the reason of Kamal singh, P. W. 4. harbouring grudge against him. On the other hand, the cause of enmity spoken by Kamal Singh, P. W. 4. is that he was the manager of the school, that Sher Mohd. According to him, it was the reason of Kamal singh, P. W. 4. harbouring grudge against him. On the other hand, the cause of enmity spoken by Kamal Singh, P. W. 4. is that he was the manager of the school, that Sher Mohd. And Sakhawat had fought election for the office of Pradhan, that he had backed Sher mohammad whereas the accused was on the side of Shekhawat and both of them were fast friends,that kharanja had been laid in his village but the front of his house had been left out and the slope of the drain had also been diverted towards his house for which he had exchanged hot words with Pradhan and the accused Jai Veer Singh, that Jai Veer Singh had held out threats to him. ( 6 ) THERE is nothing to indicate that any litigation had taken place between Kamal Singh, P. W. 4. and the accused-appellant on any score. Nor is there anything to show that Kamal Singh , p. W. 4. had been prosecuted for some misappropriation of the funds of the village school. What we wish to emphasise is that the enmity, if any, between Kamal Singh P. W. 4. and accused -appellant was not of such nature which could have actuated the appellant Jai Veer singh to commit the murder of the wife of Kamal Singh. What had been spoken about by Kamal Singh, P. W. 4. and the accused-appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C, could at the best be termed as minor skirmishes as are usually there in village life. So, the point of the matter is that there was no apparent motive on the part of the accused-appellant to indulge in this crime. Secondly the whole case is based on the testimony of two child witnesses, namely , Km. Yashoda P. W. I, and Umang alias billu, P. W. 2. who are children of the deceased. The evidence of km. Yashoda, P. W. l. was recorded on 16. 2. 1984 when she gave her age as 13 years. The evidence of Umang alias Billu, P. W. 2 was also recorded on 16. 2. 1984 and his age at that time was about 9-10 years. It is a fact that there is no corroboration of their testimonial assertions by independent sources. Yashoda, P. W. l. was recorded on 16. 2. 1984 when she gave her age as 13 years. The evidence of Umang alias Billu, P. W. 2 was also recorded on 16. 2. 1984 and his age at that time was about 9-10 years. It is a fact that there is no corroboration of their testimonial assertions by independent sources. So far as the value, which can be attached to the testimony of child witness is concerned, no fixed rule can be prescribed. At times, evidence of children is notoriously dangerous unless immediately available and unless received before any possibility of coaching is eliminated. Children have good memories and no conscience. They are easily taught stories and live in the world of make -believe. , so that they are often convinced that they have really seen the imaginary incident which they have been taught to relate. As corroboration of the evidence of Km. Yashoda p. W. I, and Umang alias Billu, P. W. 2 by independent sources is not available , we have to test their reliability keeping in view the attending circumstances including the medical evidence. ( 7 ) ON application of this process we discover basic improbabilities in the evidence of these two child witnesses. It has to be pointed out that both of them claim to have seen the occurrence in the light of a lantern. The incident took place after about midnight. Both the witnesses have stated that they could not make out as to by what weapon the accused had assaulted their mother. It does not stand to logic that at about midnight or thereafter, which was the time of sound-sleep, the lantern would have been glowing brightly. rather its flame would have ordinarily been dimmed to facilitate conformable sleep. Even if it is taken for a moment that the lantern was glowing brightly at the time of the incident after about midnight, then there could hardly be any reason for these two child witnesses not being able to see as to with what weapon she had been assaulted by the accused. It renders the testimony of both these child witnesses doubtful. ( 8 ) ANOTHER sterling reason casting cloud on the testimony of the two child witnesses is that in the F. I. R. lodged by Km. It renders the testimony of both these child witnesses doubtful. ( 8 ) ANOTHER sterling reason casting cloud on the testimony of the two child witnesses is that in the F. I. R. lodged by Km. Yashoda, P. W. I which is the earliest prosecution version, it is stated that when she awoke, she saw that the accused struck some weapon on the face of her mother. It is indicative of the fact that only one blow had been struck by the accused-appellant on the victim. On medical examination and subsequent post-mortem, as many as seven injuries were found on the person of the deceased out of which five were of sharp edged weapon and two of blunt weapon. The justifiable inference is that several blows had been struck on the victim and probably two weapons had been used to assault her, one sharp edged and the other blunt. ( 9 ) YET another reason is that though the F. I. R. is shown to have been lodged at the Police Station on 17. 7. 1983 at. 2. A. M. and the victim was sent to Primary Health Centre Govindpuri for medical examination immediately thereafter but the crime number is not found mentioned in the Chitthi Majrubi on the back of which the medical examination report is recorded. Head constable Sahi Ram sharma, P. W. 8. could not assign any reason in this behalf. It gives the impression as if the F. I. R. was not ready by that time Kamal singh P. W. 4.- husband of the victim had received the information of the incident in village Rajpura the following day wherefrom he came to Ghaziabad and then reached Mohan Nagar. The possibility cannot be ruled out that the F. I. R. was ante-timed and was actually lodged the next day after Kamal Singh, P. W. 4. returned from rajpura. This suspicion gets strengthened in the light of the mention made by Km. Yashoda, P. W. I, in the F. I. R. that the accused was inimical towards her father. Ordinarily a child of about 12-13 year of age. As Km. returned from rajpura. This suspicion gets strengthened in the light of the mention made by Km. Yashoda, P. W. I, in the F. I. R. that the accused was inimical towards her father. Ordinarily a child of about 12-13 year of age. As Km. Yashoda P. W. I, was could hardly be aware about the enmity between her father and the accused and in any case , she could hardly be expected to mention this fact in the F. I. R. It may be stated at the risk of repetition that no litigation, civil that no litigation , civil or criminal, had taken place between her father and the accused earlier to the incident. Nor has there been any noticeable incident of physical assault etc. between the two. ( 10 ) FOR the reasons discussed above, we come to the conclusion that the uncorroborated testimony of child witnesses namely Km. Yashoda P. W. 1 and Umang alias Billu, P. W. 2 suffers from inherent improbabilities and weaknesses. The possibility cannot be ruled out that the two child witnesses delivered tutored evidence. The accused-appellant could not be convicted on their such testimony,it is wholly doubtful that the accused -appellant was the assailant of the deceased victim. ( 11 ) IN the result and for the reasons discussed hereinabove, we allow this appeal and set aside the conviction under Section 302 i. P. C. and sentence of life imprisonment passed against the accused appellant by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The accused appellant is on bail. He need not surrender. His personal bond and bail bonds are hereby cancelled and sureties discharged. .