JUDGMENT Basudeva Panigrahi, J. : Death of Baruna, the daughter of Dulal Modak who was admittedly the tenant of appellant, has depicted a case of murder and rape against him who was sent up for trial. The learned Session's Judge found it a case of murder and rape, punishable under sections 376 and 302, I.P.C. and sentenced the appellant to be hanged till death. Therefore, the case has come for answering the reference as well as hearing of the appeal preferred by the accused. 2. The skeletal picture presented by the prosecution in course of trial is: That P. W. 1 Mahadev Modak lodged a written complaint to P. W. 13, O. C: Santipur PS on 25th May, 1997 by stating that his elder brother Dulal Modak was residing, for one and half years, in the house of the appellant as a tenant. The house in question was situated at Monsatala in Haripur under PS Santipur. His brother was residing with his family members. On the fateful morning at about 10 A.M. P.W. 1 along with his daughter and brother's son P. W. 4, Jaidev Modak informally visited the house of Dulal Modak. On entering into the house, the informant did not notice anybody present in the house. But, however, he found the appellant Kushal Roy, the owner of the house near about the entrance door and he was going out on riding his motorcycle. After waiting for sometime inside the house P.W. 2, Anima Modak, mother of Baruna entered into the house with her elder daughter. The informant then inquired about Baruna but the latter stated to him that Baruna was in the house when she left the house. Baruna was not traceable either in the house or in. The surrounding area. In course of search P. W.2 Anima Modak went to the bathroom and she made a shrill shriek that Baruna was found hanging on a bamboo pole with the neck being tied with a napkin and a portion of her body inside the well of the privy. Hearing this outcry P. W. 1 rushed to the bathroom and shouted out which attracted attention of some para people who reached there immediately. With the help and assistance of para people they extricated the body of Baruna from the well privy. Hearing this outcry P. W. 1 rushed to the bathroom and shouted out which attracted attention of some para people who reached there immediately. With the help and assistance of para people they extricated the body of Baruna from the well privy. They found her nude and immediately they removed the napkin from the neck and covered her body with a sari. The informant had reasonably expected for the arrival of his elder brother, but, when it consumed considerable time, he went to the police station and presented a written report. In the report it was further described that P. W. 1 also came to know from others that one N akul Ghosh, son of Tarak Ghosh of village Haripur often used to visit the house of Kushal Roy and both of them used to consume liquor. It was further mentioned in the report that Nakul Ghosh had a fresh bite mark on the left wrist. Therefore, he believed that Kushal Roy and Nakul Ghosh might have jointly committed, the cold-blooded murder of Baruna after committing rape on her. On receiving the written complaint, it was treated as F.LK, P.W. 13; Arun Kumar Das had immediately swung into action. 3. The written report was scribed by P. W. 4 Jaidev Modak, the younger brother's son of P.W. 1 P.W. 7, A.S.I. of Santipur PS received the report on 25th May, 1997 which was registered as PS Case No. 91/97 under section 302. After completion of investigation, the police submitted the charge sheet under sections 376/302/201 of the Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the appellant stood prosecuted under the aforesaid charge and was found guilty for having committed rape and murder of Baruna and sentenced to death by hanging. 4. The defence has mainly taken the plea of alibi by stating that he was an employee in the Settlement Department at Santipur and his family used to reside in his house at Belgharia. He used to come from Belgharia on every Monday and after attending the office at Santipur used to stay at his Haripur house in the evening. On every Friday after office hours he used to go back on his motorcycle to Belgharia. While coming from Belgharia he was usually parking his motorcycle in the garage belonging to Mana. Therefore, he was not present in his house on the fateful morning but had been falsely implicated in this case. 5. On every Friday after office hours he used to go back on his motorcycle to Belgharia. While coming from Belgharia he was usually parking his motorcycle in the garage belonging to Mana. Therefore, he was not present in his house on the fateful morning but had been falsely implicated in this case. 5. The appellant had temporarily allowed Dulal Modak the father of the victim to stay in the two roomed house only for few days at the request of P.W. 11 Sailen Trivedi but the house in question being in a dilapidated condition, he made up his mind to get him vacated and, therefore, asked the victim's father Dulal Modak to surrender possession of the house. Therefore, there was an ill feeling and bad blood between them. The appellant was a supporter of congress party whereas one Kumaresh Chakraborty was an influential leader of left party therefore, this case was foisted by the de facto complainant being influenced by Mr. Chakraborty due to political rivalry. Another plea had been advanced that the name of Nakul Ghosh although described in the F.I.R. who in all probability might have committed the crime, but was left out from the case. 6. The prosecution case solely depended upon circumstantial evidence in order to bring home the guilt against the appellant Kushal Roy. These circumstances have been relied upon by the prosecution narrated hereunder: (i) On 25.5.1997 at about 8.30 A.M. the appellant was in his Haripur house where Dulal Modak, the father of deceased Baruna used to live with his family consisting of five rooms, of which, two rooms were in possession of Dulal Modak. Dulal apart from himself, his wife Anima of P.W. 2, deceased Baruna his youngest daughter, mother Santi Sudha and his brother's daughter Mithu Modak P. W. 3 were also residing with him. P. W. 3 and. her grand mother Shanti Sudha left the house and went to the house of P. W. 4 Jaideb Modak before the date of incident on the occasion of Buddha Purnima. On the date of incident i.e. 25.5.1997 at about 8.39 A.M. P.W.2 Anima Modak, the mother of the victim left for Uttarpara to visit her elder daughter's house leaving Baruna in her house alone as Dulal Modak had already left the house on the same day at about 7 A.M. to search a groom for his unmarried daughter Baruna. On the date of incident i.e. 25.5.1997 at about 8.39 A.M. P.W.2 Anima Modak, the mother of the victim left for Uttarpara to visit her elder daughter's house leaving Baruna in her house alone as Dulal Modak had already left the house on the same day at about 7 A.M. to search a groom for his unmarried daughter Baruna. At the time of P.W.2's departure, she noticed Baruna and Kushal present in the house. Kushal was then shaving his face. (ii) At about 10 A.M. P. W. 1 and his brother's daughter P. W. 3 Mithu Modak while coming to Dulal's house, found the appellant going away from the house on riding his motorcycle on the foot track, connecting the pucca road from the house of Kushal Roy. (iii) After entering the house P. W. 1 and P. W.3 did not find Baruna present in the house. In the process P. W. 2 Anima Modak with her daughter Alpana arrived the house to whom P. W. 1 and P. W. 3 enquired about Baruna but P. W. 2 stated that she saw Baruna in the house then she went to fetch Alpana. P. W. 2 and Alpana went to a neighbouring house in search of Baruna. In the meanwhile Baruna was found hanging to a bamboo pole with her neck being tied by a napkin and the other portion of her body over hanging inside the well of the privy. P. W. 1 and P. W. 3 also saw it. (iv) P. W. 6 Asoke Ghosh, a neighbour of the accused also saw the dead body of Baruna hanging inside the well of a privy and her neck was tied to a bamboo pole. (v) P. W. 8 on being informed by Asoke Ghosh had been to the house of the appellant at about 11/11.30 A.M. and saw the dead body of Baruna. While coming back from the house, she found the appellant standing in front of his house under a mango tree and asked P. W. 8 to bring a bag of rice kept in his house when P. W. 8 suggested the appellant to go himself to fetch the same but the appellant avoided on the plea that he could not withstand the dreadful sight of the dead body and also her ailing mother. (vi) The appellant taking advantage of the absence of inmates of Baruna, in order to satisfy his lust and lascivious hunger committed sexual assault by ravishing her and further caused grisly murder in order to screen his offence. (vii) Medical evidence established that Baruna was raped and thereafter strangulated by smothering. (viii) In order to cause disappearance of certain evidence of the aforesaid offence the appellant also removed the dead body of Baruna and concealed it in the well of the privy with the intention of screening himself from legal punishment. (ix) Recovery of incriminating articles pursuant to the disclosure• statement recorded under section 27 of the Evidence Act. (x) The defence of alibi was proved to be false and also absconsion of the appellant immediately after the occurrence. (xi) The conduct of the accused after the death of Baruna. 7. Mr. Bose, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant has contended with vehemence that when prosecution case depends upon circumstantial evidence it should not leave any link in the chain of events missing so as to' create a doubt in the mind of Court regarding the complicity of the accused. In this case there being so many missing links by which no prudent man can come to a reasonable conclusion that it was the accused who alone had- committed such dastardly act. 8. Every evidentiary circumstance is a probative link, strong or weak, and must be made out with certainty. Link after link forged firmly knit by credible testimony may form a strong chain of sure guilt binding the accused. Each link taken separately may just suggest but when hooked on to the next and on again may lead to the conclusion inescapably against the accused who might be the author of the crime. 9. On thorough review of the previous cases as observed in 2001 March, AIR Supreme Court Weekly in the case of Kanhai Mishra vs. State of Bihar, Hon'ble Supreme Court held as follows: "It is a well established rule in criminal jurisprudence that circumstantial evidence can be reasonably made the basis of an accused person's conviction if it is of such character that the same is wholly inconsistent with innocence of the accused and is consistent only with his guilt. The incriminating circumstances for being used against the accused must be such as to lead only to a hypothesis of guilt and reasonably exclude every possibility of innocence of the accused. In a case of circumstantial evidence the whole endeavour and effort of the Court should be to find out whether the crime was committed by the accused and the circumstances proved from them into a complete chain unerringly pointing to the guilt of the accused. If the circumstances proved against the accused in a case are consistent either with the innocence of the accused or with his guilt he is entitled to the benefit of doubt. Reference in this connection may be made to a Constitutional Bench judgment of this Court in the case of M. G. Agarwal vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1963 SC 200 : (1963) 1 Cr LLJ 235 and recent decisions of this Court in the cases of Ronny alias Ronald James Alwaris vs. State of Maharashtra, (1998)3 SCC 625 : 1998 AIR SCW 1103: AIR 1998 SC 1251 : 1998 Cr. LJ 1638 and Joseph s/o. Kooueli Poulou vs. State of Kerala, (2000)5 SCC 197 : 2000 AIR SCW 1682 : AIR 2000 SC 1608 : 2000 Cr. LJ 2467." 10. Keeping the aforesaid principle in mind let us now advert to the evidence adduced by the prosecution. 11. P. W. 1, P. W. 2, P. W. 3 and P. W. 4 are undoubtedly close relation of the deceased. It has been submitted that intrinsic evidence of such witness must be scrutinized with due care and circumspection. It is true that the above witnesses are relations of the deceased. Pt is also the normal human conduct that the relations of the deceased must make sincere and faithful endeavour to see that the real culprit does not go scotfree. Merely because they are relation their testimony does not require to be discarded if their evidence is otherwise credible. 12. Mr. Bose argued inexorably that although P. W. 1 claimed to have visited the house of Dulal but such statement has not been corroborated by the other witnesses. But on careful and close scrutiny of the evidence we find P. W. 3 has supported the version of P. W. 1 who had accompanied him. 13. PW. 1 is none other than the uncle of the deceased, who has presented a graphic picture of the prosecution story. But on careful and close scrutiny of the evidence we find P. W. 3 has supported the version of P. W. 1 who had accompanied him. 13. PW. 1 is none other than the uncle of the deceased, who has presented a graphic picture of the prosecution story. He deposed that on 25th May, 1997 when he went to his brother's house, saw his brother's son Jaideb in his shop. He came along with his daughter Mithu P. W. 3 and Jaideb's son. While they reached Haripur at 10 A.M. passing through the pacca road, they found Kushal coming out of the house and proceeded towards the opposite direction riding on his motorcycle. He also did not respond to usual courtesy like previous occasion. When they entered Dulal's house by unlatching the door they did not find Baruna present in the house. At that juncture P.W. 2 Anima reached with her daughter Alpana, whom P.W. 1 asked about Baruna but P. W. 2 told him that while she left the house Baruna and the appellant Kushal were in the house around 8.30 A.M. The appellant then was himself getting shaved. All of them made a frantic search for Baruna and at last P. W. 2 noticed some of the garments of deceased Baruna in the bathroom and further found her body hanging on a bamboo pole being tied by a napkin on her neck and the other portion of her body inside the well of a privy. At that time they noticed her garments was stripped off but, however, they covered the body with a sari. For some time P. W. 1 waited for arrival of his brother but when he found his brother did not return, he proceeded to Santipur PS at about 2.30 P.M. and informed orally but on being asked by O.C. to submit a written report he accordingly filed a written complaint accordingly. 14. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant made a scathing remark about the prosecution case by inviting our attention about the involvement of Nakul Ghosh. It is true that we found Nakul Ghosh being arrested during investigation but later on let off when no evidence was allegedly available against him. 15. 14. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant made a scathing remark about the prosecution case by inviting our attention about the involvement of Nakul Ghosh. It is true that we found Nakul Ghosh being arrested during investigation but later on let off when no evidence was allegedly available against him. 15. There has been a mention in the F.I.R. that Nakul Ghosh has a fresh biting mark which P.W. 1 claimed to have learnt from someone whose name he was unable to disclose, we find the investigating agency is silent about it. From the record it is revealed that Nakul Ghosh was arrested but during investigation one outdoor slip was seized. The prosecution did not make any endeavour for getting such outdoor slip proved by which, inference could be drawn that Nakul Ghosh had some old injury. From investigation, it has transpired that there was a case made out against Nakul Ghosh. We are amazing to note, that P.W. 13 Mr. Arun Kr. Das had intentionally omitted to include Nakul Ghosh in the case. Merely because Nakul Ghosh was left out, it could not be presumed that the prosecution did not make out a case against the appellant Kushal Ray. We, hereby direct the Director General of Police to cause it investigated about the complicity of Nakul Ghosh by assigning the matter to the Crime Branch and take further steps as deemed necessary against Nakul Ghosh in accordance with law. 16. It is unfortunate to notice that when Nakul Ghosh was arrested and produced before the Magistrate and permission was taken to keep him in police custody, no steps was taken by the prosecution to get him examined by a medical officer to ascertain whether those enquiries were old or new biting injuries. The learned Session's Judge in his judgment also reflected certain scathing and caustic remarks against P.W. 13 Mr. Das for his casual, careless and lopsided attitude while conducting the prosecution case. In this background we, therefore, direct fresh investigation to be started against Nakul Ghosh who has been deliberately left out by the prosecution. The D. G. of Police may also take appropriate action for perfunctory investigation by PW. 13. 17. During investigation, P.W. 13 appeared to have seized an injury report and filed it in Court before the SDJM on 7.6.1997. He had shown to have arrested Nakul on 2nd June, 1997. The D. G. of Police may also take appropriate action for perfunctory investigation by PW. 13. 17. During investigation, P.W. 13 appeared to have seized an injury report and filed it in Court before the SDJM on 7.6.1997. He had shown to have arrested Nakul on 2nd June, 1997. The medical officer had at first described in the certificate as 'injury' but thereafter by striking the word 'injury' it was again described as 'old injury'. The date of examination was 1st June, 1997 and it was again struck off. Therefore, no credibility can be attached to such medical certificate but, however, since it has not been proved, this observation cannot be said to have been made against Nakul Ghosh who is not appearing before us. It is the investigating agency who have been directed to investigate into the case again and they shall look into this aspect. The statement of Nakul Ghosh was also recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. We are alive to the situation that statement by an accused cannot be used in course of hearing or trial except under section 27 of the Evidence Act but one cannot shut his eyes to the reality by taking note of the fact that such statement was recorded. 18. There has been no suggestion by the defence that P. W. 1 had not seen Kushal Roy coming out from his house on the fateful morning. 19. It has been contended that PW. 1 deposed in his evidence that Mithu and her mother came after sometime whereas P. W. 3 accompanied with P. W. 1. Therefore, P. W. 1 should be branded as a liar. 20. Such minor contradictions in the prosecution story are bound to occur which are spontaneous and natural. Even assuming such minor discrepancy occurs, this, however, does not weaken or debilitate the prosecution case. Therefore, since such minor contradiction is impertinent in nature, we, therefore, ignore such contradictions. 21. Mr. Basu, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant has invited our attention that although the instant case alleged to have occurred on 25th May, 1997, there has been no explanation for such delay in forwarding the F.I.R. to the nearest Magistrate. Therefore, the prosecution case should be viewed with greatest suspicion. We found that the question of delay in forwarding the prosecution report was not urged before the learned Sessions Judge. Therefore, the prosecution case should be viewed with greatest suspicion. We found that the question of delay in forwarding the prosecution report was not urged before the learned Sessions Judge. Had such question been asked to P. W. 13, he could have offered some reasonable and probable explanation for such delay. Delay in forwarding the F.I.R. to Court may occur on account of several factors. It might have been sent on the following day but due to some unavoidable circumstances, such as public holiday or due to non-availability of Magistrate, it might have been placed on 30th May, 1997. Therefore, in this conspectus of the case we, however, hold that there was no inordinate or inexplicable delay to throw out the prosecution case, which has been otherwise proved by adequate and plenty of evidence. 22. Mr. Basu, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant has strenuously urged that from the evidence of P. W. 1 in cross examination it appears that he went first to the house of Dulal Modak whereas the evidence of P. W. 3 has disclosed that she entered the house before others. Therefore, from both the version it is not known as to which of the version is true. We think there has been no contradiction as regards the arrival of P.W.1 and P. W 3 at the house of Dulal Modak and moreover the incident had taken place two years before the examination and it is quite natural that they might not have recollected such small tit-bits in detail. 23. P. W. 1 has also stated an oath that Nakul Ghosh had a fresh biting mark on his hand. 24. Mr. Bose, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant has drawn our attention that certain vital statement had not been stated during investigation under section 161, Cr.P.C. but subsequently the prosecution witnesses in order to probablise the prosecution case they exaggerated and embellished in course of trial. 25. If a portion of testimony of a witness seems to be unreliable, entire evidence cannot be thrown out on account of inconsistency. In India ordinarily exaggeration might occur in course of evidence. But onerous responsibility is cast on the Court to sift the grain from the chaff .Normal discrepancy cannot destroy the prosecution case. 26. Mr. 25. If a portion of testimony of a witness seems to be unreliable, entire evidence cannot be thrown out on account of inconsistency. In India ordinarily exaggeration might occur in course of evidence. But onerous responsibility is cast on the Court to sift the grain from the chaff .Normal discrepancy cannot destroy the prosecution case. 26. Mr. Basu placed utmost reliance on a reported judgment in AIR 1975 Supreme Court page 216 in the case of Rauulappalli Kondiah vs. State of Andhra Pradesh. 27. On a careful reading of the judgment we found the facts of the above referred case stood on a different footing. There was a long silence about the prosecution story during investigation but later on the statement was admitted to be made to embellish the story. Therefore, the Hon'ble Apex Court felt it unsafe to rely on such evidence. But we found the evidence of P. W. 1 is credible, believable and spontaneous. Therefore, we have least hesitation in our mind to rely on such evidence. 28. Mr. Moitra, the learned Advocate appearing for the prosecution has taken an incontrovertibel plea that an omission or contradiction loses its weight, when particularly contradicted by specific questions and answers which were omitted or had not been asked to the investigating officer. In this case the investigating officer P. W. 13 was not asked whether or not he had put those questions to P. W. 1, P. W. 2 and P.W. 3, which were not stated during investigation. The learned trial Court below has also come to the conclusion as a matter of fact that there was no contradiction in this particular context. The above observation is buttressed on the strength of a judgment reported in 2000 Supreme Court Cases (Criminal) in the case of Jaswant Singh vs. The State of Haryana page 991 where it is held that: "Section 161 (2) of the Code requires the person making the statements to answer truly all questions relating to such case put to him by such officer. It would, therefore, depend on the questions put by the police officer. It is true that a certain statement may now be used under section 162 to contradict such witness in the manner provided by section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. It would, therefore, depend on the questions put by the police officer. It is true that a certain statement may now be used under section 162 to contradict such witness in the manner provided by section 145 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Previously, the law was as enunciated in Tahsildar Singh vs. State of UP as : '(i) Omissions, unless by necessary implication be deemed to be part of the statement, cannot be used to contradict the statement made in the witness-box.' Now the explanation to section 162 provides that an omission to state a fact in the statement may amount to a contradiction. However, the explanation makes it clear that the omission must be a significant one and 'otherwise relevant' having regard to the context in which such omission occurs and whether any omission amounts to a contradiction in the particular context shall be a question of fact. Reading section 161 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code with the explanation to section 162, an omission in order to be significant must depend upon whether the specific question, the answer to which is omitted, was asked of the writness. In this case the investigating officer, P. W. 13 was not asked whether he had put questions to Gurdeep Kaur asking for details of the injuries inflicted or of the persons who had caused the injuries." 29. Another ground has been pressed into service by the appellant's learned Counsel that since the details of the incident has not been stated at the earliest opportune moment, therefore, their testimony in Court should not be accepted without a pinch of salt. In this regard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has relied upon a judgment reported in AIR 1994 Supreme Court page 826 in the case of Govinda vs. State of Madhya Pradesh where it is stated that: "If the witness does not give details of occurrence in the statement under section 161, Cr.P.C., that by itself is not a ground to reject the evidence." 30. Since P. W. 1, P. W. 2 and P. W. 3 have unequivocally deposed in the manner about how the occurrence had taken place, such substantive evidence cannot be whittled down nor rendered incredible only because their statement allegedly was not recorded by the I.O. under section 161, Cr.P.C. 31. Since P. W. 1, P. W. 2 and P. W. 3 have unequivocally deposed in the manner about how the occurrence had taken place, such substantive evidence cannot be whittled down nor rendered incredible only because their statement allegedly was not recorded by the I.O. under section 161, Cr.P.C. 31. P.W. 2 is the unfortunate mother of the victim, who, besides, corroborating the evidence of P. W. 1 had testified that on 25.5.1997, on the fateful morning at 8.30 A.M. she went to Uttarpara to bring her daughter Alpana on riding on by-cycle of the brother-in-law of Kushal Roy. At that time the appellant and her daughter Baruna were present in the house. Kushal Roy was getting himself shaved. 32. A contention has been raised to reject the testimony of P.W. 2 on the ground of interestedness and also on account of enmity with the appellant. But from her evidence it appears she was truthful inasmuch as her evidence disproves the plea of any enmity with the appellant. Had there been any enmity between P.W 2's family and the appellant, there was no occasion for her to go in the bye-cycle of the appellant's brother-in-law to Uttarpara. She also described the topography of the place of occurrence and also the surrounding' area to which the appellant did not dispute. The testimony of this witness also seems to be credible, as she has no hesitation to admit that the appellant used to go to Belgharia on every Friday and used to return to Haripur on Monday. They were still living as a tenant in the house of the appellant even during the course of trial of the case. 33. P. W. 3 is the daughter of P. W 1 .Her testimony lends corroboration with the evidence of P. W. 1 and she deposed that on the date of incident they went to the house of P.W. 2 at 10 A.M. and noticed that Kushal was going away shivering on his motor cycle. It may be realized that a person after committing a sin would normally get frightened/shocked at seeing others immediately after the incident unless he is a professional criminal. Therefore, it is quite but natural that the appellant must have gone away quivered on noticing P. W. 1 and P. W. 3. It may be realized that a person after committing a sin would normally get frightened/shocked at seeing others immediately after the incident unless he is a professional criminal. Therefore, it is quite but natural that the appellant must have gone away quivered on noticing P. W. 1 and P. W. 3. Her evidence disclosed that the dead body of Baruna was found hanging with her neck being tied with a bamboo pole and the leg portion was inside the well of a privy. She noticed a red coloured brassier in the mouth of the deceased Baruna. One Dilip Ghosh untied the napkin from the neck with his teeth as it was fastened heavily. We find that absolutely there is no factual infirmity nor any contradiction in course of evidence and trial. We also find no reason as to why P. W. 3 falsely shall cook- up a case against the appellant. 34. It is contended by the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant that since there were two doors in the house of Kushal Roy and P.W. 3 has claimed to have entered the house after unlatching the door. Therefore, there might not be any possibility to see the accused coming out on his motorcycle, by the time they entered into the house. We think such argument has no legs to stand as P.W. 1, and P.W. 3 must have entered through the entry door of Dulal Modak where he was residing as a tenant. 35. P. W. 4 was the scribe of the F.I.R., who had proved to have written it on the dictation of P.W.1. He was also a witness to the inquest. He noticed laceration on the breast, back, chin and shoulder of the deceased. 36. P. W. 5 happens to be a post occurrence witness who, however, does not support the prosecution and his evidence has, therefore, not been helpful to the prosecution. 37. P. W. 6 appears to be a post occurrence witness and from his evidence it has been proved by the prosecution as to how the dead body could be recovered from the well of a privy with the assistance of a iron rod brought from the house of P. W. 8. He also stated that by the time the dead body was recovered, the mouth of the deceased was stuffed with a brassier. He also stated that by the time the dead body was recovered, the mouth of the deceased was stuffed with a brassier. He also heard the shout of Dilip Ghosh who was uttering that Kushal Roy was going away. He then found Kushal Roy going away with his motorcycle. He requested another person to chase him with his motorcycle for apprehending Kushal Roy, but, however, he was unsuccessful. Although a remote suggestion was given by the defence to discard the evidence of P. W. 6 that he asked Kushal Roy to give the mango grove on lease but since he had refused such suggestion, therefore, P.W.6 had been cited as a witness. But P. W. 6 had strongly refuted such suggestion. 38. The prosecution proved through the evidence of P. W. 7, Narayan Chandra Singh that a P. S. case No. 91/97, dated 25th May, 1997 was registered under section 302, I.P.C. after receiving a complaint from P.W.1. He had in unequivocal term admitted to have received no complaint other than the exhibit 1, the F.I.R. 39. The evidence of P. W. 8 Nanda Gupta goes a long way to prove the prosecution case. It is indubitably true that she was a post occurrence witness but at the same time it shall not be the lost sight of the fact that she went to the house of P. W. 2, after giving the iron rod to P. W. 6 and noticed the dead body of Baruna was covered with a cloth and further had seen the appellant, while returning towards her house, going on a motorcycle. The appellant asked P. W.8 to bring a bag of rice, which was kept in his house. In return she made a query to the-accused as to why he himself was not going to collect it. The accused was reluctant to go to his house, as he would not withstand such ghastly scene of the dead body of Baruna and also loud cry of her mother. It appears the behaviour of the appellant was against normal human conduct. Undisputedly P. W. 2 and her family used to reside as tenant under him. The accused was reluctant to go to his house, as he would not withstand such ghastly scene of the dead body of Baruna and also loud cry of her mother. It appears the behaviour of the appellant was against normal human conduct. Undisputedly P. W. 2 and her family used to reside as tenant under him. He knew that such ghastly murder has taken place in his house and he was standing under a mango tree at the relevant times instead of going to his house to console the victim's mother, he unscrupulously avoided on the plea that he could not withstand such gruesome sight. 40. It is further case of the prosecution that the appellant made a voluntary statement. Let us consider for a moment whether such a voluntary statement even if inculpatory shall be admissible in evidence. If it satisfied the test under section 27 of the Evidence Act, then such statement of the accused can be relied upon. (i) The fact should be discovered in consequence of information received from the accused. (ii) The person disclosed such fact to the police must be an accused of an offence and should be in police custody when he supplied the information. (iii) The fact should have been deposed in presence of the witness. If these conditions are satisfied, then, that part of the information given by the accused which lead to such discovery becomes admissible in evidence. It is immaterial whether such information was supplied in connection with the same crime or a different crime. The learned Session's Judge had placed strong reliance on the judgment reported in (1997) 1 Judgment Today SC 479 in the case of State of Rajasthan vs. Bhup Ram. 41. In this case also a piece of chain of a wrist watch belonging to the accused and his smudgy full pant were discovered in consequence to the. information supplied by the appellant who was an accused in this case while in police custody. The evidence of P. Ws. 10, 11 and 13 has fully established the fact relating to such discovery, as such, it is admissible evidence. 42. Let us now advert to the statement of the accused to find out whether such fact is admissible or not. The evidence of P. Ws. 10, 11 and 13 has fully established the fact relating to such discovery, as such, it is admissible evidence. 42. Let us now advert to the statement of the accused to find out whether such fact is admissible or not. The trial Court has relied upon the principles decided by the Supreme Court in AIR 1996 SC at page 1788 in the case of A. S.Narayana vs. State of A.P. In order to determine the acceptability of the statement of the appellant under section 27 of the Evidence Act relating to discovery of the fact in issue it is held to be relevant. We also, accordingly, follow such findings with regards to the recovery from the appellant. 43. Mr. Bose, the learned Advocate appearing for the appellant has drawn our attention to a reported judgment in AIR 1983 Supreme Court page 446 in the case of Earabhadrappa vs. State of Karnataka. While deciding the acceptability of the statement it has to be considered that information must 'relate distinctly' to the fact discovered. Under section 27 so much of the information as distinctly relates to the fact thereby discovered is admissible. In this case as discussed above the recovery of a chain and also a mud stain pant was made in consequence to the statement of the appellant while in custody before the witnesses examined by the prosecution. The contention has been raised that no attempt has been made to establish the fact about the ownership of the articles so recovered. It is true that the house was under lock and key and the key was brought from the brother-in-law of the accused. It is not in dispute that the appellant was residing in that house. He does not say that the articles so recovered had not belonged to him, rather, while being in police custody he disclosed the statement and claimed the articles belonging to him. 44. The disclosure statement was made not under threat or coercion and it was out of his own volition made before the witness, to the police. 45. Now let us examine the evidence of P.W. 12 Dr. Pradip Kr. Ghosh who was the professor in the department of Forensic Science in the State Medical College, Calcutta. 44. The disclosure statement was made not under threat or coercion and it was out of his own volition made before the witness, to the police. 45. Now let us examine the evidence of P.W. 12 Dr. Pradip Kr. Ghosh who was the professor in the department of Forensic Science in the State Medical College, Calcutta. He conducted autopsy on the dead body of Baruna in connection with Santipur PS Case No.91 of 97 on being brought and identified by constable No.1423 Bimal Dutta. 46. The injury of deceased noticed by the doctor is narrated here below: "Height of the subject was 5' 1" while body weight was 48.5 Kg. General condition: Body was packed with one deep violet polythene sheet, one light green colour 'kantha' tied with coconut rope and finally with one green colour printed cotton sari. Dead body of an adult female subject with average built and nourished. Rigor mortis passed off. Body showing signs decomposition with deep greenish discolouration of skin all over except areas of injuries over neck region; bloating of face, abdomen and genitals; marbled appearance over upper aspect of both sides of chest and upper outer back part of both thighs; multiple post mortem blisters found scattered over front part of chest, both arms and inner part of both thighs; discolourizing of skin over palms; cuicular layers peeled off at places; scalp hairs 16" long black colour were loose while eggs of maggots were found in scalp hairs and over right side of face. Red nail polish were seen over fingers and toes nails; both eyes widely open with corneas hazy eye-ball bulged out from the socket, conjunctive conjested with evidences of a few pin point haemorrhagic (tardien) spots were sub-conjunctival tissues. Nails were loosened, tough and swollen and forced out between the swollen lips and sets of teeth, nails and lips were bluish in colour. Pubic hair and vaginal orifice were smeared with dried blood. Teeth were 28 in number all permanent, 14 No. in each quadrent of jaw with evidence of hard gum behind second permanent molar teeth in each quadrent of jaw, wearing appearels nil except black thread with two talisman around left arm. Injury : (1) One oblique, non-continuous ligature mark of 39.5 cm. X 2.5 cm. found all around the neck with a gap of 5.2 cm. over nape of neck. Injury : (1) One oblique, non-continuous ligature mark of 39.5 cm. X 2.5 cm. found all around the neck with a gap of 5.2 cm. over nape of neck. On right side and being placed 1 .5 cm. below right angle of lower jaw, 3.5 cm. below mid point of chin 2.5 cm. below left angle of lower jaw, 3.5 cm. above thyroid prominence and 9.5 cm. above supra sternal notch. The skin over the ligature mark was brownish, grooved, abraded at places and parchmentised. On dissection the subcutaneous tissues underneath the ligature mark was found to be condensed, hardened, whitened and glistering without any evidence of effusion of blood in it with the hyoid bone and thyroid cartilage found to be intact. (2) Deep bruising for 5 cm. X 3.5 cm. involving both sides including inner aspects. (3) Bruise 3 cm. X 1.2 cm. over tip of nose with deviation of nose-tip towards right side slightly. (4) Hymen showing tear at O C position with margin of torn hymen being sharp and red in colour. Tissues about it were found to be swollen. (5) Vagina showing deep bruising for 9.5 cm. X 2.5 cm. involving both its anterior and posterior wall. (6) Labia minora showed bruising for 3.5 cm. X 2.5 cm. over its middle aspects. Except injury No.1 all those injuries showed evidences of vital reaction and were fresh. The bruises were red in colour. No other injury either concealed or revealed including those are mentioned in inquest report over chest and waist could be detected on close observation or after careful dissection. Serosanguinous fluid coming out through mouth and mostrils. Stomach was empty. Uterus was small and non-gravid; vaginal orifice admits two fingers easily. Uterus cacity contains 5 cm. of deep red-coloured blood clot." 47. According to the medical opinion it is noticed that the injuries were anti mortem and homicidal in nature associated with the evidence of sexual violation on the deceased. Ligature mark of hanging appeared to be post mortem in nature. The evidence of doctor conducting post mortem examination had suggested that there was sexual violence upon Baruna and thereafter she was strangulated by smothering. Such observation also but- tressed from the inquest report (exhibit 3/1) along with the evidence of P.W. 8 Mrinal Kanti Mondal who conducted inquest over the dead body of Baruna. 48. The evidence of doctor conducting post mortem examination had suggested that there was sexual violence upon Baruna and thereafter she was strangulated by smothering. Such observation also but- tressed from the inquest report (exhibit 3/1) along with the evidence of P.W. 8 Mrinal Kanti Mondal who conducted inquest over the dead body of Baruna. 48. It appears that P. W. 9 had noticed blackish injury under her chin near throat, breast, right side of the waist and also a ligature mark in the neck. In the report it has been also narrated that 'cough like substance' such as seminal fluid noticed in the vagina, which has, excludes any other possibility but commission of rape on Baruna. It is must unfortunate that this witness had turned hostile and did not support the prosecution for which the learned Session's Judge has also suggested that such unscrupulous officer should be punished summarily for his hostile conduct. 49. From the aforesaid circumstances, on examination of evidence of P. W. 1, P. W. 2, P. W. 6 and P. W. 8, we found their testimony is cogent, truthful and creditworthy. So we hold that the appellant was present on the date of occurrence i.e. on 25.5.1997 at 8.30 A.M. in his residence and committed the crime. 50. The conduct of the accused also appears to be very suspicious and beyond any reasonable explanation. The incident had taken place on 25th May, 1997, which was admittedly a Sunday. Assuming he was in his residence at Belgharia there is no reason why he did not attend the office subsequently on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday until he was arrested. It is true that absconsion cannot be taken as a sole ground to determine the complicity of the appellant in the crime but from the evidence discussed above reasonable hypothesis can be drawn against him that the appellant and appellant alone who could have conducted such dastardly act. The conduct of the accused discussed above became an additional link to form a chain of circumstantial evidence pointing to the guilt of the accused. 51. Mr. Bose contended an UD case was initiated first but subsequently this case has been fabricated against the appellant. From the evidence we find there is nothing to suggest that anyone has lodged in information. 51. Mr. Bose contended an UD case was initiated first but subsequently this case has been fabricated against the appellant. From the evidence we find there is nothing to suggest that anyone has lodged in information. save and except, P. W. 1 went to the police station and explained orally and he on being asked to submit a written report which he subsequently handed over at the P.S. 52. We discussed earlier with regard to materials available against the other person Nakul Ghosh. It would not be worthwhile to further dilate on that aspects since we asked the investigating agency to further investigate into the offence and if materials available he should start a fresh case. We, therefore, did not agree with the opinion of the learned Session's Judge that in case Nakul Ghosh would have faced trial he might have been acquitted. Such finding seems to be unwarranted, unnecessary and irrelevant. 53. Another contention has been raised that the prosecution is uncertain about the place of seizure of the motorcycle belonging to the appellant and also the person from whose custody the motorcycle was allegedly seized had not been examined. We found the seizure of motorcycle by the prosecution has no relevance in this case. The learned Trial Court has also rightly held that P.W.13 Arun Kr. Das, S.I. had improperly and perfunctorily investigated into the case as a result of which many lacunae had crept into the prosecution story. But, however, while unearthing the truth or otherwise of the prosecution case we have examined in detail the statement of witnesses and found that the prosecution had been able to bring home the charge against the appellant under sections 302/376/201, I.P.C. 54. After committing grisly murder the appellant tied the dead body of Baruna to a bamboo pole on her neck and the other part of her body was thrust into the privy of a well. But he could not succeed in doing so since the well did not provide sufficient space to introduce the dead body. 55. While coming to the sentence imposed by the learned Session's Judge and answering the death reference we found that this cannot be regarded as one of the rarest of the rare cases. But he could not succeed in doing so since the well did not provide sufficient space to introduce the dead body. 55. While coming to the sentence imposed by the learned Session's Judge and answering the death reference we found that this cannot be regarded as one of the rarest of the rare cases. It is true that the appellant in order to satisfy his lascivious inclination advanced towards the victim and satisfied his sexual desire by committing rape and thereafter when the victim shouted out to divulge the incident in order to silence her he committed the murder by tying her neck to the bamboo poles and later on to screen the offence he attempted disappearance of her body. Therefore, like other rape and murder case, it had been committed by the appellant but it cannot be categorized as rarest of rare cases. 56. Therefore, in the above situation we have no other option but to commute the sentence of death into an imprisonment for life. 57. Accordingly, we do not find any merit in the appeal save and except modification of sentence by commuting it into rigorous imprisonment for life. We do not separately impose further sentence for the charges under sections 376/201, I.P.C. Malay Kumar Basu, J.: I agree. Appeal dismissed.