JUDGMENT R.L. Khurana, J.: The appellant Chand Awasthi, hereinafter referred to as the accused, stands convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (1), Kangra at Dharamsala, in Sessions Case No. 28-P/97 for the offence under section 302, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. 2. The matrix of the prosecution story may be thus stated. On 11.4.1997 Km. Ritu daughter of PW 14, SmtKamlesh Kumari at about 5.30 P.M. was brought to and admitted in the Community Health Centre at Thural in an injured condition. PW 6, Dr. K.L.Kapoor was then on emergency duty. Intimation Ex.PW 4/A was sent by him to the police through PW 4 Jatinder Awasthi, who was one of the persons who had brought Km. Ritu to the hospital. While on his way to Police Station, Lambagaon, PW 4 Jatinder Awasthi happened to meet PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand of Police Station Lambagaon at Alamapur, whereupon PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand accompanied by PW Jatinder Awasthi proceeded to the Health Centre at Thural. On reaching there, PW 22 AS.I. Suresh Chand moved an application Ex.PW 6/C to PW 6 Dr. K.L. Kapoor enquiring if Km. Ritu was fit to make a statement. PW 6 Dr. K.L.Kapoor gave the opinion that she was not fit to make a statement. Km. Ritu succumbed to her injuries and died on the same day at about 9.30 P.M.Information as to the death of Km. Ritu was given by PW 6 Dr. K.L.Kapoor to PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand vide Ex.PW 6/B. PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand in turn informed sub Inspector Dile Ram (PW 23) on telephone about the death of Km. Ritu and he himself stayed back in the hospital. After recording the information received in the daily diary, copy of which is Ex. PW 23/A, PW 23 Sub Inspector Dile Ram proceeded to the hospital and reached there at about 2.30 A.M. on 12.4.1997. Ritu and he himself stayed back in the hospital. After recording the information received in the daily diary, copy of which is Ex. PW 23/A, PW 23 Sub Inspector Dile Ram proceeded to the hospital and reached there at about 2.30 A.M. on 12.4.1997. Statement Ex.PW I/A of PW 1 Narinder Awasthi waslrecorded under section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure by PW 23 Dile Ram on the basis of which a case for the offence under section 302, Indian Penal Code, came to be registered at Police Station, Lambagao, vide FIR No. 28/97 Ex.PW 21/A. 3. During the course of investigation of the case, the dead body of Km. Ritu was subjected to post-mortem by PW 7 Dr. Dinesh Sood. The following ante-mortem injuries were found on the person of the deceased:- 1. Wound 4 cm length in dorsum of left forearm stitches have been applied Margins were sharp. 2. Incised wound about 4 cm in length on the-nar of right hand. 3. Incised wound 1 cm on lateral surface of thumb of right hand. 4. One incised wound 4 cm in length at right side of T 10 to T 12 vertebrae, laterly cutting through all muscle of back. This had run through laterally into the abdomen. 4. In the opinion PW 7 Dr. Dinesh Sood, injury No.4 was the cause of death since the said injury had cut through liver and interior cartilaginous part of 9th and 10th ribs. The death resulted due to loss of blood due to the said injury No.4, which led to shock and death. PW 6 Dr. KX.Kapoor who had initially examined Km. Ritu on her having been brought to the hospital in an injured condition, has opined that all the four injuries, referred to above, were caused by a sharp edged weapon and that injury No. 4 was dangerous to life. He has further opined that the injuries could be possibly caused by a dagger Ex. P-l. To the similar effect is the opinion of PW7 Dr. Dinesh Sood. 5. The investigation revealed that PW 1 Narinder A wasthi on 11,4.1997 at about 3.30 P.M was felling bamboo leaves at a little distance from the village water. "Baoli" (water spring) and while he was in the process of collecting such bamboo leaves he heard the cries "MAR DIYA MAR DIYA, BACHAO -BACHAO" coming from the side of the said "Baoli". The investigation revealed that PW 1 Narinder A wasthi on 11,4.1997 at about 3.30 P.M was felling bamboo leaves at a little distance from the village water. "Baoli" (water spring) and while he was in the process of collecting such bamboo leaves he heard the cries "MAR DIYA MAR DIYA, BACHAO -BACHAO" coming from the side of the said "Baoli". He immediately rushed towards the "Baoli". PW 2 Smt. Swarna Devi also reached the spot. On reaching the spot he saw the accused inflicting a blow with some sharp edged weapon on the back of Km. Ritu. After inflicting such a blow, the accused ran away. Km. Ritu fell down on the ground. She was carried home in an injured condition by PW 1 Narender Awasthi and PW 2 Smt. Swarna Devi. While at home, Km. Ritu made a statement Ex.PW 1 I/A before PW 11 Smt. Simro Devi, Ward Panch, to the effect that she was stabbed by the accused. A planquine was then arranged and Km. Ritu was carried to hospital at Thural where she succumbed to her injuries on the same day at about 9.30 P.M. 6. Investigation further revealed that few days before the occurrence, the accused was found playing cricket in the playground of the Government High School, Kona. His playing there was objected to by PW 16 Shri Ajit Singh Rana, Headmaster of the school. The bat of the accused was seized by the said Headmaster. The identity of the accused was disclosed to the Headmaster by PW 15 Vivek Kumar. Due to disclosure of his identity, the accused had given beatings to PW 15 Vivek Kumar which were objected to by the deceased K M. Ritu, who told the accused that had his identity been asked from her, she would also have disclosed the same. On this account, the accused was nourishing a grudge against the deceased Km. Ritu. 7. The accused was arrested on 12.4.1997 at about 5 P.M. Before his arrest, the accused was given beatings by an angry mob. Due to such beatings he had suffered injuries on his person. The accused was sent for medical examination. PW 8 Dr. On this account, the accused was nourishing a grudge against the deceased Km. Ritu. 7. The accused was arrested on 12.4.1997 at about 5 P.M. Before his arrest, the accused was given beatings by an angry mob. Due to such beatings he had suffered injuries on his person. The accused was sent for medical examination. PW 8 Dr. Gian Chand, upon such examination found as many as six injuries on the person of the accused vide Medico-legal certificate Ex.PW 8/A. He also referred the accused to Zonal Hospital, Dharamsata for treatment, where the accused remained admitted as an indoor patient till 17.5.1997. He was discharged from the Hospital on 18.4.1997, vide discharge certificate Ex.PW 22/B. 8. During the course of investigation and interrogation, the accused made a disclosure statement Ex. PW 10/B in the presence of PW 10 Chandi Dutt and one Onkar Chand, leading to the discovery of the dagger Ex. P-l from the bushes near the water "Baoli". On the dagger Ex.P-1 having been sent for chemical examination, though blood was found thereon, such blood was spoiled and was not fit for further test/examination. The State Forensic Science Laboratory, therefore, could not opine whether such blood was human blood or not. 9. The deceased Km. Ritu was found to have made an oral dying declaration before PW 1 Narender Awasthi, PW 2, Smt. Swarna Devi, PW 3 Parkash Singh, PW 4 Jatinder Awasthi, PW 12 Smt. Suddesh Sharma, PW 13, Smt. Geeta Devi, PW 14, Smt. Kamlesh Kumari and PW 15 Vivek Kumar to the effect that she was stabbed by the accused. 10. On a case having been found against the accused, he was accordingly sent up for trial. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial. His defence was of denial simpliciter and false implication due to inimical relations between his and deceaseds family. 11. The prosecution in support of its case examined 24 witnesses in all. No defence was led by the accused. 12. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, upon consideration of the evidence led before him came to the conclusion that a case for the offence under section 302, Indian Penal Code, stood proved against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. He accordingly vide the impugned judgment dated 30.5.1999 convicted and sentenced the. accused as aforesaid. 13. 12. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, upon consideration of the evidence led before him came to the conclusion that a case for the offence under section 302, Indian Penal Code, stood proved against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. He accordingly vide the impugned judgment dated 30.5.1999 convicted and sentenced the. accused as aforesaid. 13. Shri T.R. Chandel, Advocate, appearing for the accused, while assailing the findings recorded against the accused, has contended that actual first information report had been suppressed and that after undue and unexplained delay, a belated report Ex.PW I/A had been lodged which was treated to be the first information report. The witnesses had not been examined promptly during the course of investigation. The evidence of the witnesses was not only of a highly partisan character, but had bristled with material inconsistencies and discrepancies. It has strenuously been urged that there is material on the record to indicate the malafide on the part of the investigating agency whereby a false case has been foisted against the accused. The evidence coming on record does not establish a case against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt. The alleged dying declarations made by the deceased are not reliable and worthy of credence. Neither any disclosure statement was made by the accused nor any discovery of dagger Ex. P.I was made in pursuance thereto. 14. The learned Assistance Advocate General, on the other hand, has submitted that on the basis of clear, cogent and acceptable evidence, the learned trial court has found the prosecution case to have been established in its entirety beyond all reasonable doubts and that there is justifiable reason for interference with the conviction and sentence. 15. At the very outset.it may be stated that though PW 1 Narender Awasthi and PW 2 Smt. Swarna Devi are alleged to be the eye witnesses of the occurrence and are alleged to have seen the accused inflicting the stab blow on the back of the deceased Km.Ritu, they have not supported the prosecution story on this aspect and have categorically denied having seen the accused stabling the deceased. Both these witnesses were declared as hostile and subjected to cross-examination by the prosecution. Nothing could be elicited from them to show that either they were suppressing the truth or were in any manner interested in the accused. 16. Both these witnesses were declared as hostile and subjected to cross-examination by the prosecution. Nothing could be elicited from them to show that either they were suppressing the truth or were in any manner interested in the accused. 16. The present case came to be registered on the basis of the statement Ex.PW I/A of PW 1 Narender Awasthi recorded under section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure, by PW 23 Sub Inspector Dile Ram at Thural Hospital. According to PW 23, Sub Inspector Dile Ram, such statement was recorded by him at about 4 A.M. on 12.4.1997. 17. A perusal of Ex.PW I/A shows that the statement of PW 1 is shown to have been recorded on 11.4.1997, as is apparent from the date mentioned below the signatures of PW 23 Dile Ram. Time of recording of such statement is not mentioned. It is further evident from the endorsement made by PW 23 Dile Ram on the statement Ex.PW I/A under the head "action by police" that such endorsement is shown to have been made at 4 A.M. on 12.4.1997. The time "4 A.M." appears to have been recorded by over-writing the original time of "11 P.M.". Similarly the date 12.4.1997 appears to have been recorded by over- writing the date "11.4.1997". There is no explanation as to in whose hand such over-writing has been carried out. 18. It is the admitted case of the prosecution that on the deceased Km. Ritu having been brought to Thural Hospital, information to the police was sent vide Ex.PW 4/A by PW 6 Dr. K.L. Kapoor through PW 4 Jatinder Awasthi. It is further admitted case of the prosecution that while proceeding to Police Station, Lambagaon for delivering the message Ex.. 4/A, PW 4 Jatinder Awasthi had met PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand at Alampur and the message Ex.PW 4/A was delivered to him there. 19. PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand has admitted that PW 4 Jatinder Awasthi had met him at a place known as "Jagroop Nagar" at about 7.30. P.M. when the message Ex.PW 4/A was handed over to him and that on the receipt of Ex.PW 4/A he had gone to Thural Hospital. He reached such hospital at about 8 or 8.15. He made application Ex.PW 6/C to the doctor PW.6 Dr. Kapoor to know if Km.Ritu was fit to make a statement. PW 6 had opined that Km. He reached such hospital at about 8 or 8.15. He made application Ex.PW 6/C to the doctor PW.6 Dr. Kapoor to know if Km.Ritu was fit to make a statement. PW 6 had opined that Km. Ritu was not fit to make statement. Km. Ritu succumbed to the injuries and died at about 9.30. and information in this regard was given to him by PW 6 vide Ex.PW 6/B. 20. It is in evidence of PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand that when he reached the hospital, PW 4 Jatinder Awasthi alongwith one or two other persons and 5/7 ladies were present in the hospital. PW 1 Narender Awasthi, PW 2 Smt. Swarna Devi PW3Parkash Singh, PW4Jatinder Awasthi, PW 11 Simro Devi and PW 14Smt. Kamlesh Kumari (the other of Km. Ritu) have admitted that they had carried Km. Ritu to Thural hospital and that the police had arrived in the hospital in their presence. PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand has admitted that he remained at Thural the whole night intervening 1 lth and 12th April, 1997. 21. Surprisingly enough, though PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand was present at Thural Hospital and had been informed about the death of Km. Ritu vide Ex.PW 6/B at about 9.30. A.M. on 11.4.1997, on steps are shown to have been taken by him to record the statement of anyone of the persons present in the hospital and who had brought the deceased to the hospital. Nor any explanation is forthcoming as to why PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand, a responsible officer of the police station did not choose to record the statement of one of the persons under section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure. 22. PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand, instead of recording the statement of one of the persons who had brought the deceased to the hospital which included the mother of the deceased, is shown to have given an information about the death of the deceased on telephone to PW 23 Sub Inspector Dile Ram. The message given by PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand to PW 23 Sub Inspector Dile Ram at Police Station, Lambagaon, is shown to have been received at the police station at 10 P.M. and recorded in the daily diary at serial No. 16 by PW 23, Sub Inspector Dile Ram. ExJPW 23/A is the copy of the relevant entry of the daily diary. ExJPW 23/A is the copy of the relevant entry of the daily diary. The relevant portion of this entry reads: "Time 10 O clock (night) recorded. ASI Suresh Chand, I.O. Police Station Lambagaon has informed telephonically from C.H.C Thural that a murder has been committed at village Thural. You visit the spot immediately....." 23. PW 23 Dile Ram has deposed that on the receipt of information from PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand, he had reached the hospital at Thural at about 2.30 A.M. on 12.4.1997. ASI Suresh Cband (PW 22) was present at the hospital then. Thereafter he had recorded the statement Ex. PW I/A of PW 1 Narender Awasthi. As pointed out above, the statement of PW 1 under section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure, Ex. I/A, is shown to have been recorded at 4 A.M. on 12.4.1997. It is in the statement of PW-3 Dile Ram that before starting the investigation by inteTogating the persons present there, he had a talk with PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand apd then he had proceeded to record the statement of PW 1 Narender Awasthi. 24. As stated above, the deceased Km. Ritu had died at about 9.30 P.M. on 11.4.1997. Information about her death was given by the doctor PW 6 to PW 22ASISuresh Chand vide Ex.PW6/B immediately thereafter. PW22had in turn informed PW 23 Dile Ram on telephone about the murder at about 10 P.M. PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand has admitted that he reached Thural Hospital at about 8 or 8.15. P.M. and that he remained there during the whole night. It is, therefore, established that right from 8 or 8.15 P.M. on 11.4.1997 till 4 A.M. of 12.4.1997 when the statement Ex.PW I/A is shown to have been recorded by PW 23 Dile Ram, PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand was present in the hospital. He was having all the time in the whole world to record the statement of any of the persons present including the mother of the deceased, under section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure. He did not so. No explanation is forthcoming therefor. Such failure or lapse assumes significance especially in view of the fact thai on reaching the hospital, he was informed by the persons, who had been stabbed by the accused. He did not so. No explanation is forthcoming therefor. Such failure or lapse assumes significance especially in view of the fact thai on reaching the hospital, he was informed by the persons, who had been stabbed by the accused. PW 22 has deposed during the course of cross-examination in the following terms :- "I had reached in CHC Thural at about 8/8.15 P.M. by a van. At that time Jatinder Sharma PW.4 was accompanying by one or two persons. When I reached in the hospital about 5/7 ladies and gents were present there with Reetu. I inquired from them about the incident. They told me that Chand Awasthi accused had stabbed Reetu deceased. I did not write down the names of these ladies and gents who were present there. I did not record their statement Jatinder Awasthi PW 4 had told me that Reetu was stabbed by Chand Awasthi accused. I did not record his statement." 25. Once PW 6, Dr. K.L. Kapoor had opined that the deceased was not fit to make a statement, PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand on having been told about Km. Ritu having been stabbed by the accused, should have recorded the statement of one of the persons present in the hospital under section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure, since commission of a cognizable offence was made out. Failure on the part of PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand to record such a statement and in the absence of an explanation in this regard casts a shadow of doubt on the truthfulness of the prosecution story and the only inference is that the alleged first information report Ex.PW.l/A is the result of deliberations and consultations. Besides, the same appears to have been anti-dated and anti-timed. 26. The prosecution has relied upon two types of dying declaration, that is, one alleged to have been made by the deceased before and recorded by PW.U Smt. Simro Devi, ward Panch, and, the other oral dying declaration alleged to have been made by the deceased before PW.l Narender Awasthi, PW. 2 Smt. Swarna Devi, PW.3 Parkash Singh, PW.4 Jatinder Awasthi, PW.l 2 Smt. Sudesh Sharma, PW.13 Smt. Geeta Devi, PW.14 Smt. Kamlesh Kumari and PW.15 Vivek Kumar. 27. It is by now well settled that dying declaration is admissible in evidence and can form the basis for conviction, if found to be reliable. 2 Smt. Swarna Devi, PW.3 Parkash Singh, PW.4 Jatinder Awasthi, PW.l 2 Smt. Sudesh Sharma, PW.13 Smt. Geeta Devi, PW.14 Smt. Kamlesh Kumari and PW.15 Vivek Kumar. 27. It is by now well settled that dying declaration is admissible in evidence and can form the basis for conviction, if found to be reliable. While, it is in the nature of an exception to the general rule forbidding hearsay evidence, it is admitted on the premise that ordinarily a dying person will not falsely implicate an innocent person in the commission of a serious crime. This premise, which is based on the maxim "A man will not meet his maker with a lie in his mouth", is considered strong enough to set off the need that the maker of the statement should state so on oath and be cross-examined by the person who is sought to be implicated. In order that a dying declaration may form the sole basis for conviction without need for independent corroboration, it must be shown that person making it had the opportunity of identifying the person implicated and it is thoroughly reliable and free from blemish. If, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it is found that the maker of the statement was in a fit state of mind and had voluntarily made the statement on the basis of personal knowledge without being influenced by others and the court, on strict scrutiny, finds it to the reliable, there i s no rule of law or even of prudence that such a reliable piece of evidence should not be declaration by itself is an independent piece of evidence and can be acted upon, without seeking any corroboration, if it is found to be otherwise true and reliable. 28. A dying declaration made by a victim in a fit mental condition and on the verge of death, has a special sanctity. At the solemn moment, a person is most unlikely to make a false statement. The shadow of impending death is itself the guarantee of the truth of his declaration as to the causes and circumstances leading to his death. A dying declaration is almost sacrosanct. 29. At the solemn moment, a person is most unlikely to make a false statement. The shadow of impending death is itself the guarantee of the truth of his declaration as to the causes and circumstances leading to his death. A dying declaration is almost sacrosanct. 29. Dealing with the question of evidentiary value to be attached to a dying declaration, the Supreme Court in Kundula Bala Subrahmanyam and another v. State of Andhra Pradesh {(1993) 2 SCC 684}, had held: "Section 32(1) of the Evidence Act is an exception to the general rule that hearsay evidence is tested by cross-examination, it is not creditworthy. Under Section 32, when a statement is made by a person, as to the cause of death or as to any of the circumstances which result in his death, in cases in which the cause of that persons death comes into question, such a statement, oral or in writing, made by the deceased to the witness is a relevant fact and is admissible in evidence. The statement made by the deceased, called the dying declaration, falls in that category provided it has been made by the deceased while in a fit mental condition. A dying declaration made by person on the verge of his death has a special sanctity as at that solemn moment, a person is most unlikely to make any untrue statement. The shadow of impeding death is by itself the guarantee of the truth of the statement made by the deceased regarding the causes or circumstances leading to his death. A dying declaration, therefore, enjoys almost a sacrosanct status, as a piece of evidence, coming as it does from the mouth of the deceased victim. Once the statement of the dying person and the evidence of the witnesses testifying to the same passes the test of careful scrutiny of the courts, it becomes a very important and a reliable piece of evidence and if the court is satisfied that the dying declaration is true and free from any embellishment such a dying declaration, by itself, can be sufficient for recording conviction even without looking for any corroboration. If there are more than one dying declarations then the court has also to scrutinise all the dying declarations to find out if each one of these passes the test of being turstworthy. If there are more than one dying declarations then the court has also to scrutinise all the dying declarations to find out if each one of these passes the test of being turstworthy. The court must further find out whether the different dying declarations are consistent with each other in material particulars before accepting and relying upon the same..." 30. They dying declaration alleged to have been made by the deceased before and recorded by PW.ll Smt. Simro Devi is Ex.PW.ll/A. PW.ll has deposed that on 11.4.1997 at about 4.45. PM when she was working in her house, on hearing the cries of weeping she had gone to the house of the deceased. She saw the mother of the deceased weeping. She asked the mother of the deceased as to why she was crying. She was told that the deceased had been stabbed by the accused. She saw the deceased lying injured and soiled with blood. She asked the deceased as to who had injured her, upon which the deceased told her that "Chand had stabbed her with a knife". She had then recorded such statement which was signed by the deceased in her presence and other witnesses. 31. Ex.PW.ll/A, which is recorded in Hindi, on being translated to English, reads: "Ritu Kumari has stated that Chand Kumar son of Shyam Lai has stabbed heron 11.4.1997" 32. The above statement is shown to have been recorded in the presence of S/Shri Ajit Singh, Bishamber, P.CAwasthi, Smt. Shakuntla Devi, Urmila Devi and Santosh Kumari. None of the above said persons had been examined in the present case. 33. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place at about 4 or 4.15 PM. The deceased Kumari Ritu was brought to the hospital at Thural at about 5.30 PM when she was examined by PW. 6 Dr. K.L. Kapoor. Ex.PW. 6VA is the medico legal certificate. PW. 6 has observed in his certificate in the following terms: "The patient was brought by relations and friends with the alleged history of receiving injuries with sharp weapons. Pulse: Not recordable; B.P.: Not recordable Heat rate: 130 per minute Sub-conscious, drowsy not responding relevantly to verbal command. In between asking for water." 34. According to PW.6 Dr. K.L.Kapoor, the deceased Km. Ritu was brought sub-conscious to the hospital. Pulse: Not recordable; B.P.: Not recordable Heat rate: 130 per minute Sub-conscious, drowsy not responding relevantly to verbal command. In between asking for water." 34. According to PW.6 Dr. K.L.Kapoor, the deceased Km. Ritu was brought sub-conscious to the hospital. He had also certified that the deceased was not fit to make a statement when he was approached by PW 22 ASI Suresh Chand in this regard vide Ex.PW 6/C. He, however, express his inability, during the course of cross-examination, as to upto what time the deceased remained conscious and was able to speak after receiving the injuries. Though he has gone to state that the deceased was not fit to make a statement from the very time she was brought to him. 35. The dying declaration Ex. PW. I/A though is alleged to have been recorded on 11.4.1997 by PW. 11, the same was handed over to the police only on 14.4.1997 by PW.ll vide memo Ex. PW.ll/B, that is, on the third day after the death of the deceased. PW.l 1 Smt. Simro Devi has admitted that she had gone to the hospital on 1.4.1997, though she hastened to add that she remained in the hospital only for about ten minutes and that the police had not arrived by that time. PW.23. Sub Inspector Dile Ram, who is alleged to have reached the hospital at about 2.30 PM on 12.4.3997 though admitted that few ladies and gents were present in the hospital when he reached there, could not remember if PW.l 1 Simro Devi was present in the hospital. He has, however, admitted as under:- "Narinder Awasthi PW.l had stated that the dying declaratipn of Ritu was recorded by Simro Devi to the effect that she was stabbed by Chand Awasthi. I had not recorded the statement of Simro Devi." 36. Admittedly, PW. 1 Narinder Awasthi is not a witness to Ex.PW. 11 /A, though the prosecution claims that Ex.PW. 1 I/A was recorded by PW. 11 in his presence. PW.l Narinder Awasthi has the following to say in respect of dying declaration Ex. 1 I/A: "Deceased Reetu had made a statement to Simro Devi, Ward Panch, which was written by Simro Devi, Ward Panch. Self stated that the statement was neither made for recorded by Simro Devi in my presence. It had heard about the same. PW.l Narinder Awasthi has the following to say in respect of dying declaration Ex. 1 I/A: "Deceased Reetu had made a statement to Simro Devi, Ward Panch, which was written by Simro Devi, Ward Panch. Self stated that the statement was neither made for recorded by Simro Devi in my presence. It had heard about the same. I had not stated to the police that in my presence Reetu had made a statement before us which was recorded by Simro Devi stating therein that Chand Awasthi had inflicted injuries on her back, arms and hand with a knife." 37. PW.l Narinder Awasthi has further gone to deny the correctness of the statement Ex.PW.l/A alleged to have been recorded by PW.23 Sub-Inspector Dile Ram. He has stated that he was slapped by the police and his signatures on Ex.PW.l/A were taken under threat. 38. PW. 14 has gone to state that PW. 11 Simaro Devi was present in the hospital on 11.4.1997 when the police had arrived. PW.3 Parkash Singh has also stated that PW. 11. Simro Devi was present in the hospital, when the police arrived. If PW. 11 was present in the hospital at the time of arrival of the police, no explanation is forth coming as to why PW.l 1 did not produce the alleged dying declaration Ex.PW. 1 I/A to the police then and why it was produced three days thereafter. The only inference is that Ex.PW. 1 I/A was not in existence till 14.4.1997. when the same is shown to have been handed over to the police PW. 11 vide memo Ex. PW. 11/B. 39. The evidence of PW.ll Smt. Simro Devi and that of PW.14. Smt. Kamlesh Kumari as regard the making and recording of dying declaration is contradictory. PW. 11 Smt. Simro Devi has deposed: "It is correct that first of all when I reached in the house of Ritu, I came to know from the mother of Ritu that Chand Awasthi had stabbed Ritu. I was told by her mother to write down the statement of Ritu.....The paper was taken by me from the house of Ritu. The paper was handed over to me by the son of Kamlesh. I do not know his name, but he is nick-named as Lali. ExJPW. 1 I/A statement was written with a ball-pen. I was told by her mother to write down the statement of Ritu.....The paper was taken by me from the house of Ritu. The paper was handed over to me by the son of Kamlesh. I do not know his name, but he is nick-named as Lali. ExJPW. 1 I/A statement was written with a ball-pen. The ball pen was taken by me from the house of Ritu.M On the other and, PW.14.Snit. Kamlesh Kumari has deposed: "I had not stated to Simro Devi that Ritu had been stabbed by Chand. I had not directed Simro Devi to write a statement that Chand had stabbed Ritu. Paper on which statement ExPW.l I/A was written was brought by Simro Devi from her house." 40. On the basis of the evidence coming on record, the making of the alleged dying declaration Ex.PW. 1 I/A by the deceased is not free from doubt. Evidence is also lacking to shows that the deceased was in a fit state of mind at the relevant time. Therefore, the learned trial Judge has erred in placing reliance on the alleged dying declaration Ex.PW. 1 I/A in holding the accused guilty of the offence. 41. Next comes the oral dying declarations alleged to have been made by the deceased to PW. 1 Narinder Kumar, PW.2 Smt. Swarna Devi, PW.3 Parkash Singh, PW.4 Jatinder Awasthi, PW.12 Sudesh Sharma, PW.13 Smt. Geeta Devi, PW. 14 Smt. Kamlesh Kumari and PW. 15 Vivek Kumar. 42. In our view such oral dying declarations have not been proved to have beeji made by the deceased beyond a reasonable doubt and as such not worthy of reliance for basing a conviction thereon. 43. As pointed out above, according to the prosecutions own case, PW.l Narinder Awasthi and PW.2 Smt. Swarna Devi are the eye witnesses of the occurrence and they had seen the accused inflicting a knife blow on the person of the deceased before running away. A perusal of the statement Ex.PW. I/A of PW. 1 recorded under section 154, Code of Criminal Procedure, also shows that PW. 1 Narinder Awasthi and PW.2 Smt. Swarna Devi are alleged to have seen the accused stabbing the deceased. If these two witnesses had seen the accused! stabbing the deceased, there was no occasion for them to have enquired from the deceased about the cause of her having sustained the injuries. 1 Narinder Awasthi and PW.2 Smt. Swarna Devi are alleged to have seen the accused stabbing the deceased. If these two witnesses had seen the accused! stabbing the deceased, there was no occasion for them to have enquired from the deceased about the cause of her having sustained the injuries. Both these witnesses have stated that on their having asked the deceased she had stated that she was stabbed by the accused. 44. PW.3 Parkash Singh has stated that on 11.4.1997 at about 4 PM he heard the noise from the side of the house of the deceased upon which he had gone there and found the deceased Km. Ritu lying injured on a cot in a pool of blood. He has further stated that on his having asked the deceased about the cause of injuries, she stated: "Uncle jee, I have been stabbed with a knife by Chand" 45. Though PW.3 has admitted that he was present in the hospital on 11.4.1997 at the time of arrival of the police, he never disclosed about the statement made to him by the deceased. A statement in this regard was made by him to the police only on 14.4.1997. Even on 12.4.1997 at the time of preparation of the inquest reports in his presence, he did not state to the police about the alleged oral dying declaration made to him by the deceased. 46. According to PW.4 Jatinder Awasthi the oral dying declaration was made to him by the deceased at Thural hospital. The evidence of this witness can be ignored simply on the ground that as per PW.6 Dr.KX.Kapoor, the deceased right from the moment she was brought to the hospital was not fit to make a statement. 47. PW.l 2 Smt. Sudesh Sharma in her.deposition made in court claims that the deceased Ritu on having been enquired by her had told her about her having been stabbed by the accused. However, in her statement Ex. DA recorded under section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure, she had not so stated. PW.13 Geeta Devi has deposed that when the deceased told her about her having been stabbed by the accused, only the mother of the deceased was present. However, as per PW.14 Smt. Kamlesh Kumari (mother of the deceased) almost half of the villagers had gathered at her house when the deceased was brought home PW. 1 and PW.2. 48. PW.13 Geeta Devi has deposed that when the deceased told her about her having been stabbed by the accused, only the mother of the deceased was present. However, as per PW.14 Smt. Kamlesh Kumari (mother of the deceased) almost half of the villagers had gathered at her house when the deceased was brought home PW. 1 and PW.2. 48. The evidence of PW.14 Smt. Kamlesh Kumari is self contradictory. While in her examination in chief, she has deposed. "My daughter was brought lifted by Narinder Kumar PW.l and Swarna Devi PW.2 in injured condition. At that time I was present in my house. I saw injuries on her back, hands and arm. She was in pool of blood. I asked her upon which she replied that Chand had stabbed her with knife." 49. However, during the course of cross examination, she has gone to state:- “When I reached near"Radha Krishna temple to bring the aluminum pot, I heard the cries from the side of Baoli. I had heard the cries of my daughter saying that Chand had stabbed her "and save her." She has further stated:- "I tried to catch hold of the accused in that process blanket came in my hand and accused ran away. The blanket came in my hand near Radha Krishan temple towards Baoli. At that time he was running alone. There was none at that time near Radha Krishan temple. It is wrong to suggest that Chand had not met me nor I tried to catch him." 50. The version coming during cross examination of PW.14 shows that When she was going towards the "Baoli" on hearing the cries of her daughter she saw the accused running away and when she tried to catch him, his blanket came into her hands. This version is absolutely contradictory co the version coming her examination in chief that when she was at home, her daughter was i brought home in an injured condition by PW.l and PW.2. Besides, she has improved upon the version given by her to the police in her statement Ex. DC recorded under section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure. 51. PW.5 Vivek Kumar has admitted that he had neither asked the deceased about the cause of injuries nor the deceased/had told him about the accused having stabbed her. He had only heard the deceased telling some; ladies that the accused had stabbed her. DC recorded under section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure. 51. PW.5 Vivek Kumar has admitted that he had neither asked the deceased about the cause of injuries nor the deceased/had told him about the accused having stabbed her. He had only heard the deceased telling some; ladies that the accused had stabbed her. PW.15 has further stated that though he was directed by PW.l Narinder Awasthi to inform the villagers that the deceased had been stabbed, PW. 1 had not named anyone as the person who had stabbed the deceased. 52. Reliance has also been placed by the prosecution on the disclosure statement Ex PW. 10/B alleged to have been made by the accused on 19.4.1997 in the presence of PW.l 0 Chandi Dutt and one Onkar pursuance thereof.. 53. It is in the statement of PW.2 Sub Inspector Rahul Sharma that the accused was interrogated and the disclosure statement Ex.PW 10/B was made at Police Station Lambagaon. PW 10 Chandi Dutt and Onkar Chand, the two witnesses were summoned from village Garthun. None from Lambagaon was summoned though there are 300/400 houses there. Summoning of witnesses from a far away place by the investigation officer shows that he was aware that a disclosure statement was going to be made. 54. The dagger Ex.P-1 is shown to have been discovered at the instance of the accused in pursuance of his disclosure statement Ex.PW 10/B in the presence of PW 9 Udham Singh and PW 11 Smt. Simro Devi vide memo Ex.P. 9/G. PW Smt. Simro Devi is silent on the aspect of recovery of dagger Ex.P-1 at the instance of the accused. The version of PW 9 Udham Singh as to the discovery of the dagger Ex.P.l in his examination-in- chief and the one in cross-examination is self contradictory. 55. Though it can be said that there is some amount of consistency in the i evidence with regard to the making of the disclosure statement by the accused and the recovery of dagger in pursuance thereof, but mere congruity or consis-i tency is not the sole test of truth. Sometimes even falsehood is given an adroit I appearance of truth, so that truth disappears and falsehood comes on the surface. {See: Lakshman Prasad v. State of Bihar AIR 1981SC1388}. 56. Sometimes even falsehood is given an adroit I appearance of truth, so that truth disappears and falsehood comes on the surface. {See: Lakshman Prasad v. State of Bihar AIR 1981SC1388}. 56. Insofar as the finding of blood stains on the clothes of the accused is concerned, suffice to say that as per the prosecution own case the accused was given beatings by the mob before he was arrested and as a result of such beatings he had sustained injuries and remained under treatment at Zonal Hospital, Dharamsala till 17.4.1997. such blood stains could be from the blood of the accused himself. There is no evidence to show that any stains on such clothes was of the same blood group as that of the deceased. Therefore, the presence of blood stains on the clothes of the accused cannot be pressed into service against the accused. 57. Assuming that the accused had the motive as alleged by the prosecu-tion, the mere presence of motives and also the presence of blood stains on the clothes of the accused is wholly insufficient for sustaining a charge of murder against the accused. On this point we are supported by the decision of the Supreme Court in Narsinbhai Haribhai etc. v. Chhatrasingh and others {AIR 1977 SC 1753}. 58. For the foregoing reasons therefore, we are unable to rely upon and accept the evidence led by the prosecution. On the basis of evidence coming on record, we are satisfied that the prosecution has not been able to prove the offence against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. The accused is entitled to benefit of doubt. 59. Resultantly, the present appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence imposed upon the accused by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, vide the impugned judgment dated 30.5.1998, are set aside and he is acquitted of the offence under section 302, Indian Penal Code, 60. The accused, who is lodged in jail and undergoing sentence, shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. 61. The amount of fine, if already deposited, shall be refund to the accused forthwith. 62. The case property be dealt with in accordance with law and as per the directions of the learned trial Court. Appeal Allowed