JUDGMENT 1. - By the above-mentioned judgment, the appellant-Anada Singh was convicted under sections 394, 397, 398 Sr 302. of the IPC and he was sentenced to various terms, as given below : (1) For the offence u/s. 302 IPC Imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and rigorous imprisonment for two years, for default in payment of fine. (2) For offence punishable under section 394 IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-and rigorous imprisonment for one year, for default in payment of fine. (3) For offence punishable under section 397, IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/-and rigorous imprisonment for one year, for default in payment of fine. (4) For offence punishable under section 398, IPC Rigorous Imprisonment for 10 years and a fine of Rs. 5,000/and rigorous imprisonment for one year, for default in payment of fine. 2. The co-accused-Ali was acquitted of the charge under section 412 of the IPC. Anada Singh has filed the jail appeal against his conviction as well as sentence. 3. The facts of the case may be briefly stated as below : 4. On 28.5.1994, Dudh Singh Rawat submitted the First Information Report Ex. P/1 before the Station House Officer, Deogarh at Kachhawali (Naya Talab) at 4.00 a.m. In the First Information Report, Dudh Singh stated that on 27.5.1994, his mother Smt. Banni, and two relatives Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Nenu started from house at about 4.00 a.m. with a view to go to Paliyawas to bring mangoes (keriyas) On the same date at about 6.30 p.m., Pushpa went to Dudh Singh. She was weeping and she told that Mohan Singh Rawat has given information in the village that three women who were returning from the jungle of Paliyawas with mangoes (keriyas), have been murdered near the 'magara'. Their legs have been cut. On receiving this information from Pushpa, Dudh Singh rushed towards the spot where the dead bodies of three ladies were said to be lying. In the way he met Gopal Singh, Man Singh, Viram Singh, Dungar Singh, Sardar Singh, Narayan Singh and several other members. All of whom accompanied him to the spot. He found that the dead body of his mother (Smt. Banni) was lying. In the way he met Gopal Singh, Man Singh, Viram Singh, Dungar Singh, Sardar Singh, Narayan Singh and several other members. All of whom accompanied him to the spot. He found that the dead body of his mother (Smt. Banni) was lying. Her both the legs had been cut and silver 'kadiyas' as well as silver 'katariyas' were not present on her body and there were several injuries on her mother's body and they appear to be caused with sharp weapon. The mangoes (keriyas) which had been placed in a plastic bag were lying scattered there. The dead body of Smt. Bhanwari was also found near the dead body of Smt. Banni. There were injuries caused by sharp weapon on the legs and other parts of the body of Smt. Bhanwari. At some distance, from where the dead bodies of Smt. Banni and Smt. Bhanwari were found, Smt. Nenu was found in injured condition. She was crying. she told that an young man who was putting on pent and Baniyan and was armed with bare sword, had inflicted injuries on her body as well as on the bodies of Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Banni. Smt. Nenu was also crying that she should be taken to the hospital otherwise she would die. Vikram Singh. Narayan Singh, Gopal Singh and some others, took Smt. Nenu to the Hospital. Dudh Singh remained at the spot. In the First Information Report, it was also mentioned by Dudh Singh that Smt. Nenu had told him that the man who had inflicted injuries was putting on a black pent and baniyan with full sleaves. 5. On the basis of the First Information Report Ex. P/1 submitted by Dudh Singh, the Station House Officer of the Police Station, Deogarh registered a case under sections 302 & 304 of the IPC and commenced investigation. 6. After investigation, report under section 173(2) of the Cr.P.C. was submitted in the Court of Civil Judge (JD)-cum-Judicial Magistrate, Deogarh. On the basis of the police report, the Civil Judge (JD)-cum-Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Deogarh, took cognizance of the offences under sections 302, 394, 397, 398 & 412 of the IPC and committed the case to the Court of the District & Sessions Judge, Rajsamand. 7. Accused-appellant-Anada Singh was charged under sections 302, 394, 397 & 398 of the IPC. He pleaded not guilty to the charges. 7. Accused-appellant-Anada Singh was charged under sections 302, 394, 397 & 398 of the IPC. He pleaded not guilty to the charges. Co-accused-Ali was charged under section 412 of the IPC. He pleaded not guilty to the charge. 8. The prosecution examined Dudh Singh (PW 1), Roop Singh (PW 2), Deep Singh (PW 3), Peeru (PW 4), Dr. Indra Lal (PW 5), Shrawan (PW 6), Narayan Singh (PW 7), Gheesa Singh (PW 8), Govind Singh (PW 9), Bag Singh (PW 10), Fateh Singh (PW 11), Bhanwar Lal (PW 12), Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13), Madan Singh (PW 14), Lal Singh (PW 15), Nim Singh (PW 16), Man Singh (PW 17) & Kishan Singh (PW 18) in support of the prosecution case. As many as 48 documents were produced in evidence by the prosecution. Both the accused-persons were examined under section 313 of the Cr.P.C. The accused-persons did not examine any witness in defence. 9. After hearing the arguments and considering the evidence produced by the prosecution, the learned District & Sessions Judge, Rajsamand convicted and sentenced the accused-appellant-Anada Singh under sections 302, 394, 397 & 398 of the IPC. Accused-Ali was acquitted of the charge under section 412 of the IPC. 10. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that in this case there is no direct evidence to connect the appellant with the alleged crime and the only evidence which has been relied upon by the learned Sessions Judge for convicting the accused is the evidence relating to the recovery of some ornaments at the instance of the appellant, is not reliable and the evidence of identification of the ornaments is also not reliable. He has, therefore, prayed that the accused-appellant-Anada Singh be acquitted of all the four charges framed against him. In the alternative, the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it cannot be inferred with certainty that it was the accused-appellant who committed the murders of three ladies, namely, Smt. Banni, Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Nenu and the only inference which could be drawn in the facts and circumstances of the case would be that he is the receiver of the stolen property and, therefore, his liability does not travel beyond the scope of Section 412 of the IPC. 11. The learned Public Prosecutor has supported the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Sessions Judge. 11. The learned Public Prosecutor has supported the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Sessions Judge. He has, therefore, prayed for the dismissal of the appeal. 12. At the out set, it may be pointed out that Smt. Nenu, who was taken to the hospital for treatment, did not survive. She breathed her last in the hospital. 13. In order to prove that Smt. Banni, Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Nenu, died on account of the injuries inflicted on their bodies, the prosecution has produced in evidence, the postmortem-examination report Ex. P/20 of Smt. Bhanwari, postmortem-examination report Ex. P/21 of Smt. Banni Devi and the postmortem-examination report Ex. P/46 of Smt. Nenu Bai. Medico-legal report Ex. P/45, showing result of X-ray examination of the injuries of Smt. Nenu Bai has also been produced in evidence. 14. Dr. Indra Lal (PW 5) has given evidence to the effect that on 28.5.1994 he was posted as Medical officer at the Referral Hospital, Deogarh and on that day a Board was constituted to conduct the postmortem-examination. Dr. Indra Lal (PW 5) has stated that he was a member of the Board and the other two members of the Board were Dr. Jasvinder Singh and Dr. Shashi Gupta. It is further stated by Dr. Indra lal (PW 5) that on conducting the postmortem-examination of the dead body of Smt. Bhanwari W/o Fatah Singh. 11 injuries were found which were mentioned in the postmortem-examination report. All the injuries were caused by sharp weapon. Injury No. 1 was on neck, Injury No. 2 was on finger, Injury No. 5 was on the back side of the neck, Injury No. 6 was on head and Injuries No. 8 & 9 were on right leg. The Injury No. 6 was on the head and was upto meningeal level and the skull bone had been cut. Dr. Indra Lal (PW5) has proved his signatures as well as signatures of other two members of the Board on the postmortem report Ex. P/20 and opined that the injuries of Smt. Bhanwari could have been caused with an axe and she had died on account of the injuries inflicted on her body. Dr. Indra Lal (PW 5) has further added that the postmortem-examination of Smt. Banni Devi W/o Shri Kishan Singh was conducted by the Board. P/20 and opined that the injuries of Smt. Bhanwari could have been caused with an axe and she had died on account of the injuries inflicted on her body. Dr. Indra Lal (PW 5) has further added that the postmortem-examination of Smt. Banni Devi W/o Shri Kishan Singh was conducted by the Board. The lower ⅓rd part of both the legs was cut and there were 13 injuries, except injury No. 10, caused by sharp weapon on the body of the deceased. Right thumb had been severed. Injury No. 7 was on neck and artery had been damaged and injury No. 8 was on right cheek below the ear and it extended upto the collar bone. Injury No. 9 was also on the neck. Injury No. 11 was on right cheek. Injury No. 12 was on the ear and injury No. 13 was on the front side of the neck. Injury No. 2 was on the radius and ulna which had been fractured. Dr. Indra Lal has proved his signatures as well as other members of the Board on the postmortem-examination report Ex. P721 and has stated that, except injury No. 10, all other injuries could have been caused with an axe and the cause of death of the deceased was haemorrhage which had resulted on account of the injuries. 15. Dr. Indra Lal (PW 5) has further added that on 27.5.1994, he examined injuries of injured Smt. Nenu and prepared the medico-legal report of injuries which is Ex. P/22. He has stated that there were eight injuries on her body and all the injuries had been caused with sharp weapon. Injury No. 4 was on the left hand on third and fourth finger which have been severed. Injuries No. 1, 2 and 3 were on the hand. Injury No. 5 was on small finger. Injury No. 6 was on the lower ⅓rd of the left leg. Injury No. 8 had resulted in fracture of right elbow. 16. The postmortem-examination reports Ex. P/20 and Ex. P/21 were admitted by the counsel for the accused-persons. The medico-legal report Ex. P/22 was also admitted by the accused-persons. The M.L.C. report Ex. P/45 of the injuries of Smt. Nenu and the postmortem-examination report Ex. P/46 of dead body of Smt. Nenu were admitted by the counsel for the accused-persons. It appears that in view of the admission of Ex. P/45 and Ex. The medico-legal report Ex. P/22 was also admitted by the accused-persons. The M.L.C. report Ex. P/45 of the injuries of Smt. Nenu and the postmortem-examination report Ex. P/46 of dead body of Smt. Nenu were admitted by the counsel for the accused-persons. It appears that in view of the admission of Ex. P/45 and Ex. P/46 by the counsel for the accused-persons, the prosecution did not produce the doctor who had conducted the radiological examination of the injuries of Smt. Nenu nor examined the doctor who conducted the postmortem-examination of the dead body of Smt. Nenu. 17. The learned Sessions Judge, for the reasons best known to him, did not ask the witness Dr. Indra Lal (PW 5) when he was in the witness-box, to give the descriptions of the injuries which he found on the dead bodies of Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Banni. It is well established that the primary evidence of the injuries found on the dead body, is the statement of doctor, in the Court and the postmortem-examination report as well as the medico-legal report of the injuries produced in evidence are to be used for the purpose of corroborating or contradicting the doctor. In murder trial, it is also necessary to ask the doctor who conducted the medico-legal examination of the injured or the postmortem-examination of the dead body, to give his opinion about the nature of injuries. Criminal trials, particularly the sessions trials, must be conducted carefully with a view to do justice to the parties. If the sessions trials, are conducted in a careless manner, one can only guess what amount of injustice is likely to be caused to the prosecution or the accused. We express our displeasure on the manner in which the learned Sessions Judge has recorded the statement of Dr. Indra Lal (PW 5) without asking the witness to state on oath the injuries which he had examined on the dead bodies of Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Banni at the time of postmortem-examination. 18. Since Ex. P/20 and Ex. P/21 have been admitted by the counsel for the accused, we take it for granted that the accused does not challenge the contents of the postmortem-examination reports. 19. Ex. P/20 shows that there were as many as 11 injuries on the dead body of Smt. Bhanwari. The injuries recorded on Ex. P/20 are given below : 1. P/20 and Ex. P/21 have been admitted by the counsel for the accused, we take it for granted that the accused does not challenge the contents of the postmortem-examination reports. 19. Ex. P/20 shows that there were as many as 11 injuries on the dead body of Smt. Bhanwari. The injuries recorded on Ex. P/20 are given below : 1. Incised wound 31/2" x 1" communicating at the level of laryngeal exists at thyroid level. 2. Incised wound 3" x 1" x bone deep over posterior aspect of proximal ⅓rd of left FA. 3. Incised wound 1" x 1/4" x skin deep posterior aspect of distal ⅓rd of left FA. 4. Incised wound 1/2" x linear x bone deep anterior aspect of distal phalanx of left middle finger. 5. Incised wound 3" x 1/2" x skin deep over posterior aspect of neck. 6. Incised wound 2" x 3/4" x meningeal level posterior ⅓rd of occipital region left side. 7. Incised wound involving the ventral aspect of proximal phalanx of right index, middle and ring finger bone deep. 8. Incised wound 3" x 2" x bone deep posterior aspect of distal ⅓rd of right leg. 9. Incised wound 1"x 1/4" subcutaneous medial aspect of distal ⅓rd of right leg. 10. Incised wound 2" x 11/2 x bone narrow deep anterior aspect to the joint above the left ankle. 11. Incised wound 21/2" x 1/2" x bone deep over posterior aspect of left foot. 12. Incised wound 2" x 3/4" x meningeal level posterior ⅓rd of occipital region. 20. According to the opinion of the Board, the cause of death of Smt. Bhanwari was haemorrhage and shock which was due to bleeding from several wounds. 21. The postmortem report Ex. P/21 shows that there were following injuries on the dead body of Smt. Banni : 1. There is traumatics amputation of both legs at their lower ⅓rd portion, cutting (separating), bones, skin, muscles, tendons etc. 2. Incised wound 2-1/22" x 11/2" x passing obliquely through full thickness of radius and ulna right side. 3. Incised wound 2" x 1" x passing through obliquelhy through left ulna. 4. Traurnatics amputation of left thumb at the metatano phalangeal level. 5. Incised wound 4" x 21/2" x tendon level over dorsum of left hand. 6. 2. Incised wound 2-1/22" x 11/2" x passing obliquely through full thickness of radius and ulna right side. 3. Incised wound 2" x 1" x passing through obliquelhy through left ulna. 4. Traurnatics amputation of left thumb at the metatano phalangeal level. 5. Incised wound 4" x 21/2" x tendon level over dorsum of left hand. 6. Incised wound 11/2" x 3/4" x wound communicating with oral cavity, over right side of exterior nose to right side of upper lip. 7. Incised wound 11/2" x 3/4" x muscle deep over right lateral aspect of neck. The blood vessels of this area are injured. 8. Incised would 4" x 1" x bone deep involving right cheek and right parietal region, partly right side of cervicle region. 9. Incised wound 3" x 1" x muscle deep over posterior aspect of neck 10. Abrasion 21/2" x 11/2" x sup. over right occipital region. 11. Incised wound 21/2" x1/2" x muscle deep wound communicating with left cavity of mouth over left cheek. 12. Incised wound 3/4" x1/4" x passing through lobule of left pinna of ear. 13. Incised wound 2" x1/4" x skin deep over anterior aspect of neck (thyroid cartilage level). 22. Ex. P/22 is the medico-legal report of the injuries of Smt. Nenu. This report shows that there were as many as eight injuries on her body. Ex. P/45 is the M.L.C. report of the X-ray examination of injuries of Smt. Nenu Devi. This report shows that there was fracture of the mid part of left second metacarpal and multiple fractures of the phalanges with few fractured fragments missing and there was also fracture of the upper part of right ulna. The postmortem-examination report Ex. P/46 shows that following injuries were found on the dead body of Smt. Nenu : 1. Incised wound 10 cm x 2 cms x bone deep horizontally on the back of neck. Cervical vertebra C2 and C3 exposed and fractured. 2. Incised wound 7 cm x 2 cm x bone deep horizontally . cm below injury No. 1 cervical vertebra C3 exposed and fractured. 3. Incised wound 10 x 2 cm x bone deep on right parietal region. 4. Traumatic amputation of 3rd and 4th of left hand finger at metacarpo phalangeal level. 5. Incised wound 2 cm x 1.5 cm x bone deep on dorsum of left 5th finger. 6. Incised wound 6 x 2.5 cm. 3. Incised wound 10 x 2 cm x bone deep on right parietal region. 4. Traumatic amputation of 3rd and 4th of left hand finger at metacarpo phalangeal level. 5. Incised wound 2 cm x 1.5 cm x bone deep on dorsum of left 5th finger. 6. Incised wound 6 x 2.5 cm. x bone deep on lateral aspect of lower ⅓rd of right leg. 7. Incised wound 6 x 2.5 cms. x muscle deep 1 cm below injury No. 6. 8. Incised wound 7 x 2 cms. x bone deep 1.5 cm below injury No. 7. There was fracture of fibula bone. 9. Compound fracture with dislocation of right elbow joint with ex-posing fracture ends of bones. 10. Incised wound 5 x 4 cms x muscle deep on middle ⅓rd of left arm horizontally. 23. On dissection of the head, it was found that below wound of injury No. 3 and the right parietal bone, portion 7 x 3 cms was completely missing and was chopped. The wound was brain deep and cutting membranes brain of size 5 x 2 ans. on right prietal region. The cause of death, according to the postmortem-examination report Ex. P/46, was shock due to injury to cervical spine and head injury. In this report, the doctor has also mentioned that the injury was self-sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. 24. The prosecution has also produced in evidence the photographs of the dead-bodies which had been taken after commencement of the investigation. The photographs in which the dead bodies or injured body have been shown are marked as Ex. P/32, Ex. P/33, Ex. P/34, Ex. P/35 and Ex. P/36. A perusal of these photographs showing the dead bodies as well as the postmortem-examination reports and the injuries stated therein, leave no room for doubt that the three ladies, namely, Smt. Bhanwari, Smt. Banni and Smt. Nenu were assaulted with sharp weapon in a brutal manner and the injuries inflicted on them, were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are convinced that the person or persons, who caused injuries to them, must have intended to kill them. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are convinced that the person or persons, who caused injuries to them, must have intended to kill them. The injuries which were found on the dead bodies, must be presumed to have been inflicted intentionally and, in the facts and circumstances of the case, it may be inferred without any reasonable doubt that the offender/offenders, intended to kill and that they knew that the injuries are likely to cause death. The nature of injuries, leaves no room for doubt that the injuries on these three victims were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. We, therefore, hold that the offence which had been committed by infliction of injuries on Smt. Bhanwari, Smt. Banni and Smt. Nenu, is squarely covered by Section 300, firstly, 300, secondly and 300, thirdly of the IPC. 25. In order to prove that the ornaments had been dis-honestly removed from the bodies of the victims, the prosecution has produced Dudh Singh (PW 1). Dudh Singh (PW 1) has stated that Smt. Banni was his mother and Smt. Bhanwari as well as Smt. Nenu were his guests and they went to the jungle on 27.5.1994 with an object of bringing mangoes (keriyas). Dudh Singh (PW 1) has further added that at about 6.30 p.m., his niece Pushpa told him that Mohan Singh who had come from the side of jungle, had told that three ladies were lying dead in the jungle near the 'magara'. Dudh Singh (PW 1) has added that he proceeded towards the spot and, in the way, he met Gopal Singh, Man Singh, Narayan Singh, Sardar Singh and some others and, in the company of those persons, he went to the place where the dead bodies were lying. Dudh Singh (PW 1) has added that the dead body of his mother was lying there. Both the legs had been cut and silver 'kadiyas' which his mother was putting on her legs were missing. Silver 'katariyas' which she used to put on her arms were also missing. The mangoes (keriyas) which had been collected by the deceased were lying scattered. Dudh Singh (PW 1) has also given statement about another dead body and stated that 'kadiyas' were present on the legs but the 'kandora' which was putting on her, was not traceable. Silver 'katariyas' which she used to put on her arms were also missing. The mangoes (keriyas) which had been collected by the deceased were lying scattered. Dudh Singh (PW 1) has also given statement about another dead body and stated that 'kadiyas' were present on the legs but the 'kandora' which was putting on her, was not traceable. This statement is obviously about the dead body of Smt. Bhanwari, though the learned Sessions Judge has not cared to dictte the name of Smt. Bhanwari when the statement of the witness was being recorded by typist. Dudh Singh (PW 1) has further added that Smt. Nenu - mother of Smt. Bhanwari was lying at some distance in an injured condition. She was crying and she told that an young man, who was putting on 'baniyan' with full sleeves and a pent, reached with a naked sword in his hand and he had caused the injuries. 26. Dudh Singh (PW 1) has, thus, tried to prove that when he saw the dead bodies of his mother, Smt. Banni and Smt. Bhanwari, he found that silver 'kadiyas' which his mother was putting on her legs and silver 'katariyas' which she was putting on her arms, were missing. Regarding the ornaments of Smt. Bhanwari, statement of Dudh Singh (PW 1) shows that 'kandora' of Smt. Bhanwari was missing. A perusal of photographs of the dead bodies, levaves no room for any doubt in it that the assault had been made on Smt. Banni, Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Nenu with the object of dis-honestly depriving them of their ornaments which they were putting on, at the time of incident. Photographs Ex. P/36 clearly shows that both the feet of Smt. Banni had been severed from the body and several injuries were caused on other parts of the body also. Photographs Ex. P/36, corroborates statement of Dudh Singh (PW 1) who has stated that silver 'kadiyas' which she used to put on her legs and silver 'katariyas', which she used to put on her arms were missing. Photographs Ex. P/32, Ex. P/33 and Ex. P/34 are of the dead body of Smt. Bhanwari. These photographs show that the silver 'kadiyas' were present on the legs just above the ankle. The 'kandora' is not visible in the photographs. Photographs Ex. P/32, Ex. P/33 and Ex. P/34 are of the dead body of Smt. Bhanwari. These photographs show that the silver 'kadiyas' were present on the legs just above the ankle. The 'kandora' is not visible in the photographs. In our opinion, these photographs corroborate statement of Dudh Singh (PW 1) which is to the effect that though the silver 'kadiyas' of Smt. Bhanwari were present on her legs but the 'kandora' was missing. In our opinion, statement of Dudh Singh (PW 1) clearly shows that silver 'kadiyas' and silver 'katariyas' had been dis-honestly removed from the dead body of Smt. Banni and 'kandora' had been removed dishonestly from the dead body of Smt. Bhanwari soon after inflicting injuries on her body the fatal injuries. We, therefore, hold that the prosecution evidence is sufficient to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that Smt. Banni, Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Nenu were not only murdered by inflicting injuries on their bodies with sharp weapon, the silver ornaments of Smt. Banni and Smt. Bhanwari had also been dis-honestly removed and taken away by the offender/offenders. 27. It is true that there is no eye-witness of the occurrence but there is a circumstantial evidence on which reliance has been placed by the prosecution to connect the accused-persons with the alleged crime. The prosecution evidence consists of the informations given by accused-Anada Singh and All under section 27 of the Evidence Act and recovery of ornaments at the instance of the accused-persons. The prosecution has also tried to prove that the ornaments which had been recovered at the instance of the accused-persons were of the deceased ladies, namely, Smt. Banni and Smt. Bhanwari. The information which the accused-Anada Singh gave to the Investigating Officer on 2.8.1994 is recorded on Ex. P/28. According to the prosecution, accused-Anada Singh gave information about silver 'kandora' and 'kadiyas' which he had concealed in his residential house and offered to get the same recorded and this information was recorded on Ex. P/28. The prosecution has also tried to prove that co-accused-Ali gave information on 2.8.1994 about silver 'kadiyas' and one 'kandora' which he sold at the shop and this information was recorded on Ex. P/29. P/28. The prosecution has also tried to prove that co-accused-Ali gave information on 2.8.1994 about silver 'kadiyas' and one 'kandora' which he sold at the shop and this information was recorded on Ex. P/29. The prosecution has also tried to prove that, at the instance of the accused-Anada Singh, a pair of silver 'kadiyas' was recovered from inside the residential house of Anada Singh who himself produced the same to the Investigating Office and recovery memo Ex. P/19 was prepared and the pair of silver 'Kadiyas' were sealed then and there, in presence of the motbirs. The prosecution has also tried to prove that, at the instance of co-accused-Ali, one silver 'kandora' had been recovered from the house of accused-Ali and the recovery memo Ex. P/23 had been prepared and the 'kandora' was placed in the sealed packet. In order to prove that these ornaments, viz., a pair of silver 'kadiyas' and a 'kandora' which had been recovered by the Investigating Officer during investigation from the possession of the accused-persons, belong to the deceased ladies, the prosecution has examined Fateh Singh (PW 11) and Nim Singh (PW 16). Fateh Singh (PW 11) has stated on oath that he had identified a pair of 'kadiyas' and one 'kandora' in presence of Tehsildar, Deogarh and these ornaments belong to his wife. 28. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the evidence produced by the prosecution regarding the information given by the appellant under section 27 of the Evidence Act as well as the evidence relating to recovery of one pair of 'kadiyas' at the instance of the accused is unreliable. At the cost of repetition it may be pointed out that, according to the prosecution, only a pair of 'kadiyas' had been recovered in pursuance of the information given by the accused-appellant under section 27 of the Evidence Act. 'Kandora' was recovered by the Investigating Officer in pursuance of the information given by co-accused-Ali. Since Ali has been acquitted of the charge under section 412 of the IPC, it is not necessary to consider the evidence relating to the recovery of 'kandora' at the instance of Ali. 29. Madan Singh (PW 14) is the Investigating Officer of the case, he has stated on oath that on 27.5.1994, he was posted as Station House Officer of the Police Station, Deogarh. 29. Madan Singh (PW 14) is the Investigating Officer of the case, he has stated on oath that on 27.5.1994, he was posted as Station House Officer of the Police Station, Deogarh. On that day, at about 10.00 p.m., Bhanwar Lal Mahajan informed him on telephone that two ladies had been murdered in the jungle and they were lying there and the third woman was taken to the Government Hospital, Deogarh in an injured condition. Madan Singh (PW 14) has added that he entered this information in the daily diary of the police station and went to the Government Hospital, Deogarh with police officials, namely, A.S.I. Man Singh and Shoor Singh. At Deogarh hospital, he recorded the statement of Smt. Nenu who was in an injured condition. This statement is Ex. P/31. Madan Singh (PW 14) has proved his signatures on Ex. P/31 and also proved the thumb impression of Smt. Nenu on it. According to him Smt. Nenu was in a serious condition and, therefore, she was sent to Government Hospital at Udaipur where she died. Madan Singh (PW 14) has further added that he proceeded to the spot and, at village Kacholi, Dudh Singh submitted before him Ex. P/1 report, on the basis of which he directed registration of the case and sent the same to the police station. It is further submitted by him that a case was registered and First Information Report Ex. P/32 had been registered. According to him, when he reached the spot, he inspected the site and prepared Ex. P/2. The blood stained clothes of Smt. Banni were taken into custody and recovery memo Ex. P/3 was prepared in presence of motbir Ganesh and the clothes were sealed then and there. Blood stained clothes of Smt. Bhanwari were also sealed and recovery memo Ex. P/4 was prepared. It is also stated by Madan Singh (PW 14) that on the spot mangoes (keriyas) were lying scattered. He prepared the recovery memo Ex. P/5 in respect of the bag containing mangoes (keriyas). On the spot, he found shoes, 'chappals' and glass-bangles in broken condition, one 'jhumar' and one rupee, which were recovered and recovery memo Ex. P/6 was prepared. He collected the blood smeared soil as well as controlled soil and prepared Ex. P/8, Ex. P/9, Ex. P/10, Ex. P/11 & Ex. P/13. Panchnamas of dead bodies of Smt. Banni and Smt. Bhanwari were prepared. P/6 was prepared. He collected the blood smeared soil as well as controlled soil and prepared Ex. P/8, Ex. P/9, Ex. P/10, Ex. P/11 & Ex. P/13. Panchnamas of dead bodies of Smt. Banni and Smt. Bhanwari were prepared. These have been marked as Ex. P/13 & Ex. P/14. After postmortem-examination, the dead bodies of Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Banni were handed over to their relatives. It is also stated by Madan Singh (PW 14) that Smt. Nenu died at the Government Hospital, Udaipur. The blood stained clothes of Smt. Nenu have been seized by Head Constable Mohan Singh. It is also stated by Madan Singh (PW 14) that photographs were also taken and Ex. P/32 to Ex. P/44 are the positive prints of the photographs taken at the site. 30. Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13) was posted as Deputy Superintendent of Police at Bhim. He has stated that on 29.5.1994, he conduct investigation in the case. He recorded the statements of some witnesses and arrested the accused-Anada Singh and Ali on 1.8.1994 and prepared the arrest memos Ex. P/26 and Ex. P/27. Regarding the information given by the accused-persons, Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13) has added that, on 2.8.1994, Anada Singh gave him information that he had concealed silver 'kadiyas' in a beddings in his house and he was prepared to get them recovered and this information was recorded on Ex. P/28. Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13) has proved his signatures as well as thumb impression of accused-Anada Singh. Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13) has further added that, in pursuance of the information given by Anada Singh, he went to the house of Anada Singh, with Anada Singh and Motbirs. The accused entered in his house and from inside a beddings which was placed on 'tanned', he produced a pair of silver 'kadiyas' before him. Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13) has stated that he sealed pair of 'kadiyas' produced by the accused-Anada Singh and prepared recover memo Ex. P/19 on which the accused put his thumb impressions and the motbirs also put their thumb impressions. Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13) has been cross-examined but there is nothing in his cross-examination to show that his statement is false or is open to doubt. 31. Recovery memo Ex. P/19 had been prepared in presence of motbirs, namely, Peeru and Sua. P/19 on which the accused put his thumb impressions and the motbirs also put their thumb impressions. Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13) has been cross-examined but there is nothing in his cross-examination to show that his statement is false or is open to doubt. 31. Recovery memo Ex. P/19 had been prepared in presence of motbirs, namely, Peeru and Sua. Peeru (PW 4) have given evidence to the effect that he accompanied the police official and the accused to the house of the accused. The police official and the accused persons went inside the house of the accused and when they came out, a pair of 'kadiyas' was in the hands of police official who told that the 'kadiyas' had been recovered from the house of the accused. It is also stated by him that recovery memo Ex. P/19 had been prepared on which he put his signatures. In cross-examination, he has stated that before entering the room of the accused, the police had called him and that the house of the accused consisted of one small room. The second motbir has not been produced in evidence. The statement of Peeru (PW 4) has not been shaken in the cross-examination and it corroborates the statement of Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13) so far as the recovery of a pair of silver 'kadiyas' from inside the house of the accused is concerned. We, therefore, hold that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that during investigation, the accused-Anada Singh gave information about 'kadiyas' and 'kandora' which were recorded on Ex. P/28 and, in pursuance of the said information, when the accused was taken to his house, the accused produced a pair of 'kadiyas' from inside his room and the same were sealed then and there and recovery memo Ex. P/19 had been prepared. We, therefore, hold that the giving of information under section 27 of the Evidence Act and about the pair of 'kadiyas' and recovery of 'kadiyas' in pursuance of the information given by the accused-Anada Singh has been proved beyond reasonable doubt and it has also been proved beyond reasonable doubt that the 'kadiyas' had been recovered from inside the house belonging to the accused and the accused himself produced the same before Ram Niwas Sharma (PW 13). 32. 32. The pair of 'kadiyas' recovered from possession of Anada Singh as well as the 'kandora' (recovered from the possession of co-accused-Ali) were identified by Fateh Singh (PW 11) and Nim Singh (PW 16) in presence of the Tehsildar on 27.8.1994. The memo of identification has been produced in evidence and it is Ex. P/30. Lal Singh (PW 15) is the Tehsildar in whose presence the ornaments had been identified by Fateh Singh (PW 11) and Nim Singh (PW 16). He has stated on oath that, on 27.8.1994, he was posted as Tehsildar, Deogarh. On that day, a test identification of the ornaments was got done by him on the request of the police officers. It is stated by Lal Singh (PW 15) that the police had produced the ornaments before him in sealed condition. He opened the sealed packets and found one pair of silver 'kadiyas' and one silver 'kandora' inside them. It is also stated by him that he mixed one pair of silver 'kadiyas' and one silver 'kandora' with them and the witnesses, namely, Fateh Singh and Nim Singh were called by him, one by one, and both of them correctly identified the pair of 'kadiyas' as well as the 'kandora'. Lal Singh (PW 15) has proved the memo of test identification which is Ex. P/30 and stated that Fateh Singh and Nim Singh put their thumb impressions on it and, after conducting the test identification, he again sealed the ornaments and returned them to the police. In cross-examination, he has stated that ornaments which had been identified before him were not different' from the ornaments which are generally worn by ladies in that part of the region (Mewar). There is nothing in cross-examination of Lal Singh (PW 15) to show that he is given a false statement or that he did not conduct the test identification proceedings in the manner stated by him. We, therefore, hold that the statement of Lal Singh (PW 15) is reliable and it is sufficient to prove that, in his presence, Fateh Singh (PW 11) and Nim Singh (PW 16) had correctly identified the pair of silver 'kadiyas' as well as the 'kandora'. 33. Fateh Singh (PW 11) and Nim Singh (PW 16), both have been produced in evidence by the prosecution. 33. Fateh Singh (PW 11) and Nim Singh (PW 16), both have been produced in evidence by the prosecution. Fateh Singh (PW 11) has stated that he identified the 'kandora' and the pair of 'kadiyas' in presence of the Tehsildar, Deogarh. It is also added that these ornaments were put on by his wife (Smt. Bhanwari). It is also stated by him that his father-in-law Nim Singh had also identified these ornamentrs in presence of the Tehsildar. The only question which was put to this witness in cross-examination was that the ornaments which had been mixed (at the time of test identification) were also old. Since the statement of Fateh Singh (PW 11) is corroborated by the statement of Lal Singh (PW 15) before whom the test identification was conducted and during test identification, Fateh Singh (PW 11) correctly identified both the ornaments. We hold that the statement of Fateh Singh (PW 11) is reliable. It is true that a pair of 'kadiyas' which Smt. Bhanwari was putting on her legs at the time of incident, were not removed from her person though injuries with sharp weapon had been inflicted on her legs above the ankles. The 'kadiyas' about which Fateh Singh (PW 11) has given statement in Court, appear to have been removed from the body of Smt. Nenu after causing injuries to her. Since Smt. Bhanwari W/o Fateh Singh, was the daughter of Smt. Nenu, it is quite natural that Smt. Bhanwari had used the ornaments belonging to her mother Smt. Nenu and this explains why the pair of 'kadiyas' which had been removed from the body of Smt. Bhanwari, were identified by Fateh Singh (PW 11) as the ornaments which his wife used to put on. So far as the 'kandora' is concerned, there is no dispute in it that when the dead bodies were found by Dudh Singh and others, the 'kandora' which Smt. Bhanwari used to put on her waist was missing. Nim Singh (PW 16) is husband of Smt. Nenu Devi and father of Smt. Bhanwari Devi. He has stated that both had been killed and their legs had been cut. Nim Singh (PW 16) is husband of Smt. Nenu Devi and father of Smt. Bhanwari Devi. He has stated that both had been killed and their legs had been cut. It is also stated by him that his wife (Smt. Nenu Dei) was putting on silver 'kadiyas' on her legs and silver 'katariyas' on her arms and his daughter Smt. Bhanwari used to put on 'kadiyas' on her legs and 'kandora' on her waist, out of which 'kandora' had been taken away by those who assaulted her. Nim Sigh (PW 16) correctly identified 'Kadiyas' Article-1 in the Court and told that the pair of 'kadiyas' belongs to his wife (Smt. Nenu). Regarding 'kandora' Article-2, Nim Singh (PW 16) stated that the 'kandora' belongs to his daughter Smt. Bhanwari. He has also identified the tops Article-3 and glass-bangles Article-4 but they are not connected with the accused. 34. In cross-examination, Nim Singh (PW 16) has stated that test identification was conducted by the Tehsildar at the police station, after mixing the ornaments which had been brought from Deogarh. At one place, he has stated that the ornaments had been mixed in his presence. On the basis of this statement, the learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that evidence of this witness Nim Singh (PW 16) shows that the Tehsildar did not take precautions to keep Nim Singh (PW 16) out of the room when the ornaments which were to be mixed, were mixed with the ornaments which were to be identified. We do not find any force in this submission. 35. The golden rule of evidence is that the parties should produce the best evidence in the case. The expression "best evidence" has not been defined any where but having regard to the provisions of the Evidence Act, best evidence means the evidence which is most natural, most proximate to the fact in question and coming from the most responsible person so that its probative value is higher than any other piece of evidence and, on the basis of such evidence, finding regarding the fact in question may be given by the Court without any hesitation. In the instant case, the best evidence about the precautions taken by the Tehsildar at the time of conducting the test identification, is the evidence of the Tehsildar Lal Singh (PW 15). In the instant case, the best evidence about the precautions taken by the Tehsildar at the time of conducting the test identification, is the evidence of the Tehsildar Lal Singh (PW 15). He was the person responsible for conducting the test identification in a proper manner. There is nothing in the statement of Lal Singh (PW 15) to show that he had mixed the ornaments brought from Deogarh with the ornaments which were to be identified, in presence of Nim Singh (PW 16) or Fateh Singh (PW 11). In our considered view, in cases where the best evidence has been produced by the parties to prove a fact, so long the best evidence is not shaken by cross-examination or otherwise as may be required in the case, the best evidence cannot be thrown away on the basis of casual statement given by any other person or witness. The best evidence rule, is one of the most important rules of the evidence. A party who wants to show that the best evidence produced in the case is not reliable, must take steps by cross-examination or otherwise to show that the best evidence is not truthworthy. So long the best evidence produced in the case is not shaken or in not proved to be false or open to any doubt, it would be impermissible to discard the best evidence produced in the case on the basis of a casual statement made by some other witness whose statement does not fall in the category of best evidence in regard to the fact in question. We, therefore, hold that, in the instant case, test identification had been conducted properly, as is established by the evidence of Lal Singh (PW 15). 36. For the reasons mentioned above, we hold that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that he pair of silver 'kadiyas' which had been recovered from the house of the accused-Anada Singh in pursuance of the information given by the accused-Anada Singh under section 27 of the Evidence Act, are proved to be the same which Smt. Nenu was putting on her at the time of incident. We, therefore, have no doubt in it that the prosecution has proved that the pair of silver 'kadiyasc recovered by the police are the same which had been removed from the body of Smt. Nenu after causing to her injuries with sharp weapon. 37. We, therefore, have no doubt in it that the prosecution has proved that the pair of silver 'kadiyasc recovered by the police are the same which had been removed from the body of Smt. Nenu after causing to her injuries with sharp weapon. 37. The learned counsel for the accused-appellant-Anada Singh has submitted that, in the instant case, the appellant-Anada Singh cannot be held guilty of offences punishable under sections 302, 394, 397 & 398 of the IPC because there was a delay of about 21/2 months between the date of commission of offences and the recovery of the silver 'kadivas'. We have carefully considered this submission. Section 114 of the Evidence Act reads "114. Court may presume existence of certain facts.The Court may presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct and public and private business, in their relation to the facts of the particular case." Illustration (a) given Section 114, Evidence Act is in the following words:- "(a) that a man who is in the possession of stolen goods soon after the theft is either the thief or the has received the goods knowing them to be stolen, unless he can account for his possession. 38. Illustration (a) given in Section 114 of the Evidence Act, indicates that if the recovery of stolen goods soon after the commission of the act of theft, the Court may presume that the person from whose possession the goods were recovered is either the thief or he has received the goods knowing them to be stolen unless he can account for his possession. It is well established that the illustrations given in Section 114 of the Evidence Act are not exhaustive of the provisions contained in this section. They are only illustrative. Section 114 of the Evidence Act requires the Court to take into consideration, (a) the common course of natural events, (b) the common course of human conduct and (c) the common course of public and private business, in their relation to the facts of particular case. What inference should be drawn from a particular fact or a set of fact established by evidence before the Court, is the matter for the Court to decide. What inference should be drawn from a particular fact or a set of fact established by evidence before the Court, is the matter for the Court to decide. In the instant case, it has been prop es by the prosecution that a pair of silver 'kadiyas' was recovered from the possession of the accused-Anada Singh in pursuance of the information given by him under section 27 of the Evidence Act and that this pair of 'kadiyas' was the same which had been dis-honestly removed from the body of Smt. Nenu after she had been injured by infliction of several wounds on her body with sharp weapon and which wounds resulted in her death. There is no explanation whatsoever to suggest that the accused-appellant-Anada Singh obtained the pair of silver 'kadiyas' belonging to Smt. Nenu in an innocent manner. In such circumstances, in our opinion, two questions arise, (1) whether accused-appellant-Anada Singh, received the pair of 'kadiyas' from some other persons or he himself removed the pair of silver 'kadiyas' from the body of Smt. Nenu and (2)(a), in case it is held that the accused-appellant had received the 'kadiyas' from some other person, whether he received with the knowledge that they had been obtained after committing murder and theft and 2(b) in case it is held that the accused-Anada Singh himself removed the pair of silver 'kadiyas' from the dead body of Smt. Nenu, whether he is the author of the injuries which were found on the dead body of Smt. Nenu and which proved fatal. 39. We have carefully considered' all the facts and circumstances of the case. There is no possibility that the accused-Anada Singh might have obtained the pair of silver 'kadiyas' from some other person. If the accused had received the pair of silver 'kadiyas' from some other person, there was nothing to prevent him from stating in his examination under section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code that he had fained the pair of 'kadiyas' from a particular person named by him. In place of giving an explanation as to how he came in possession of pair of silver 'kadiyas', the accused-appellant-Arvada Singh has denied the information given by him under section 27 of the Evidence Act and further denied the recovery of 'kadiyas' from his house. In place of giving an explanation as to how he came in possession of pair of silver 'kadiyas', the accused-appellant-Arvada Singh has denied the information given by him under section 27 of the Evidence Act and further denied the recovery of 'kadiyas' from his house. In the absence of an explanation of the accused to the effect that he had obtained the pair of silver 'kadiyas' from some other person, it would not be permissible for the Court to draw an inference that the pair of 'kadiyas' had been obtained by the accused-appellant from some other person, unless the circumstances appearing in the evidence do lead to this inference. So far as the explanation of the accused is concerned, we have already pointed out that the accused had totally denied the recovery of silver 'kadiyas' from his possession and he has not stated that he had obtained the silver 'kadiyas' from any other person. So far as circumstances of this case are concerned, it is a case in which three ladies were brutally murdered when they were returning from the jungle after collecting unriped mangoes. They were putting on silver ornaments, i.e., 'kadiyas' on the legs, 'kandora' on the waist, 'katariyas' on the arms and tops. All the three ladies were injured with sharp weapon in a brutal manner. The feet of Smt. Banni had been completely severed from the legs in order to remove the silver 'kadiyas'. Grievous injuries had been inflicted on the lower ⅓rd of the legs of Smt. Bhanwari with a view to severe her feet from the legs so as to take out her silver 'kadiyas' and injuries had also been inflicted on the legs of Smt. Nenu with a view to remove her 'kadiyas'. This was a case of tripple murder committed with the object of facilitating robbery. Probably murders of this kind, is not an event as could have been forgotten by the people or by the police. In these circumstances, the culprits who removed these silver ornaments, after wounding the victims fatally, must have known that it would be better for them to wait rather than to make an attempt to sell the ornaments in the market, lest they may be apprehended on suspicion and found guilty after a thorough investigation. In these circumstances, the culprits who removed these silver ornaments, after wounding the victims fatally, must have known that it would be better for them to wait rather than to make an attempt to sell the ornaments in the market, lest they may be apprehended on suspicion and found guilty after a thorough investigation. When such serious offences, as involved murders of more persons than one, are committed in order to facilitate the commission of robbery, for fear of apprehension, the culprits do not make an attempt to sell ornaments soon after the incident. To save themselves, they keep silence and wait till the memories of events become dim in the minds of the people of the locality and of those who are likely to have remembered such events. In view of this, in our opinion, there was nothing unnatural on the part of the accused-appellant-Anada Singh to have omitted to make an attempt to sell the ornaments in the market till the date of recovery. No person who was a party to brutal act of murder of three ladies and to robbery, would have dared to give the ornaments to any other person either for sale or for any other reason. We, therefore, hold that having regard to the particular facts and circumstances of the case and the common course of human conduct, there is not even the remotest possibility that the accused-appellant might have received the pair of silver 'kadiyas' from any other person. They only inference which may be drawn, in the facts and circumstances of this case, is that it was the accused-appellant-Anada Singh who himself had committed the ghastly crime of committing murders of three ladies, namely, Smt. Banni, Smt. Bhanwari and Smt. Nenu and removing the ornaments from their bodies. We, therefore, hold that the prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused-appellant-Anada Singh, has committed the offences punishable under sections 302, 394, 397 & 398 of the IPC. The learned Sessions Judge has, therefore, not committed any error of law and the fact in convicting the accused-appellant-Anada Singh for the above-mentioned offences. 40. For the reasons mentioned above, there is no force in this appeal and it deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Accused-Anada Singh is in jail. He will serve out the sentences awarded to him. 41. 40. For the reasons mentioned above, there is no force in this appeal and it deserves to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. Accused-Anada Singh is in jail. He will serve out the sentences awarded to him. 41. Co-accused-Ali, from whose possession one silver 'kandora' belonging to Smt. Bhanwari had been recovered, was not tried on the charges under sections 302, 394, 397 & 398 of the IPC and was acquitted. The learned Sessions Judge has acquitted co-accused-Ali on the ground that charge against him was not proved beyond reasonable doubt but no reasons whatsoever have been assigned for giving the benefit of doubt to co-accused-Ali. After carefully perusing the record, we hold that grave injustice has occurred on account of omitting to try co-accused-Ali on the charges under sections 302, 394, 397 &.398 of the IPC and by trying him on the charge under section 412 of the IPC and giving him benefit of doubt. It is, therefore, necessary that this Court should suo moto exercise powers under section 397 Of the Cr.P.C., to undo miscarriage of justice. It is, therefore, directed that a separate file under section 397 of the Cr.P.C. be open. On that file, certified copies of all relevant documents including copy of the judgment delivered by the Sessions Judge and the copy of the judgment of this Court be placed and, thereafter, the file be submitted before the Court for appropriate orders. It is further directed that the record of the case as well as the material exhibits including the ornaments shall be preserved and no part thereof shall be destroyed or disposed of without express orders of this Court.Appeal dismissed. *******