JUDGMENT - D.G. DESHPANDE, J.:---This is a case where accused No. 1 Ranjana-the wife of the victim, who claims to be "Sati-Savitri" of Kaliyug, has challenged her conviction under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, in which she, as accused No. 1, and her paramour, as accused No. 2, were sentenced to life and, for the reasons forthcoming, we have no hesitation to hold that this accused No. 1, the so called "Sati-Savitri", was responsible and behind the gruesome and brutal murder of her husband with the help of accused No. 2. 2. Heard Mr. More for accused No. 1. So far as accused No. 2 is concerned, he has filed Criminal Appeal No. 600 of 1997. Though the matter was heard continuously for 3-4 days, accused No. 2 was absent right from the beginning. We, therefore, appointed Advocate Mr. A.V. Shetye for accused No. 2 to assist the Court. He took pains to go through the record and made his submissions which were mostly in conformity with the submissions made by Mr. More. We have also heard learned A.P.P. for the State/respondent. 3. Accused No. 1 Ranjana Laxman Mukharji is the wife of deceased Laxman Shivappa Mukharji. Accused No. 2 Karim Ajij Chabukswar is her paramour and both of them are alleged to have murdered Laxman Shivappa Mukharji on the night intervening between 29th September, 1995 and 30th September, 1995. 4. At this juncture, it is necessary to find out as to what the prosecution case is? However, it has to be clarified that the prosecution case, as it is clear and understood by the terms, is different from the F.I.R. because the F.I.R. gives different story whereas the prosecution case gives different story. In her statement, accused No. 1 has come with altogether a different story. Therefore, there are three versions before the trial Court. The first version is as disclosed in the F.I.R. The second version is as the case developed by the prosecution with reference to the charges framed against the accused. And the third version is as per the defence raised by accused No. 1 Ranjana in the written statement tendered by her under section 233(2) of the Cri.P.C. 5-A. THE PROSECUTION STORY.---According to the prosecution, the relations between accused No. 1 Ranjana and deceased Laxman were strained. There were litigations between them. And the third version is as per the defence raised by accused No. 1 Ranjana in the written statement tendered by her under section 233(2) of the Cri.P.C. 5-A. THE PROSECUTION STORY.---According to the prosecution, the relations between accused No. 1 Ranjana and deceased Laxman were strained. There were litigations between them. Accused No. 1 Ranjana had filed application under section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code against deceased Laxman and she succeeded in getting maintenance at the rate of Rs. 500/- per month from him. The Revision filed by deceased Laxman against that order came to be dismissed. Therefore, there were living separately for about three months. Six months prior to the incident, it is alleged by the prosecution that, Snehal, the son of the deceased and accused No. 1 Ranjana, felt a need of some senior family member in the family as his wife was to deliver soon. He therefore requested his father that it was the appropriate time to call back Ranjana. The father was reluctant, however, he agreed to call back Ranjana provided she gave up her relationship with accused No. 2 Karim, which was basically the cause of feud between the deceased and accused No. 1 Ranjana. Snehal communicated the decision of his father to accused No. 1 Ranjana. She agreed by the suggestion, and therefore, since six months prior to the incident she started living with the family which consisted of deceased Laxman the husband of accused No. 2 Ranjana, Snehal Son No. 2, Shamal Son No. 1 and the wife of Snehal. 5-B. On the date of the incident, in the morning, Snehal was going to the market, his mother accused No. 1 was accompanying him and when they came to the market she asked him to drop her near a mosque as she wanted to meet accused No. 2. Snehal objected, but accused No. 1 went to meet accused No. 2. In the evening accused No. 2 was found in the house of accused No. 1. There also Snehal took objection on two occasions, but accused No. 1 gave false excuses as a result of which accused No. 2 continued to be in the house on that night right from the evening. In the evening accused No. 2 was found in the house of accused No. 1. There also Snehal took objection on two occasions, but accused No. 1 gave false excuses as a result of which accused No. 2 continued to be in the house on that night right from the evening. 5-C. Sometime around midnight or so, Snehal, Shamal and wife of Snehal were woken up by accused No. 1, chilli powder was thrown in their eyes and they were taken to the bathroom by accused No. 1 on the pretext that some assailants had come to assault the deceased. Accused No. 1 is alleged to have bolted the door of the bathroom from outside. The deceased, during the assault, shouted 'Dada Dada', that is in the name of Snehal. Snehal therefore tried to open the door of the bathroom but it was bolted from the outside. Snehal and Shamal gave calls from windows of the bathroom. The tenants were altered and they were told to open the door of the bathroom. Two tenants went to the gate of the bungalow or to the door of the bungalow. They pressed the call bell. The door was not opened. Ultimately they got frustrated and came back to the window of the bathroom from outside and reported their inability and they left. The door was ultimately opened at about 5.30 p.m. or so by accused No. 1 and the boys found that their father was dead. 5-X. STORY IN F.I.R. :---The following story given in the F.I.R. was lodged by Shamal in the morning of 30th September, 1995. That on the previous day of the F.I.R. his father went to the office and brother went to the college. He returned to the house at 12.30 noon. Both the brothers returned at 5.00 p.m. in the evening. At 8.30 p.m. they took dinner and he went to his room to sleep, his mother accused No. 1 and Snehal were used to sleep in the other room. The father came to the house at 10.00 p.m. and had some talk. Thereafter lights were closed, but one Zero bulb was burning. After about one hour suddenly he was pulled from the cot by his mother and asked him to get up as somebody had come in the house. The father came to the house at 10.00 p.m. and had some talk. Thereafter lights were closed, but one Zero bulb was burning. After about one hour suddenly he was pulled from the cot by his mother and asked him to get up as somebody had come in the house. As soon as he opened his eyes, somebody threw chilli powder in his eyes, as a result of which he could not see anything. Then he was dragged by his mother to kitchen and thereafter Snehal and his wife were also brought and all of them were kept in the kitchen, and then taken to bath room and the mother bolted the door from outside. 5-X(ii). Both Shamal and Snehal questioned the mother as to why she was doing so. But she did not reply nor did she give explanation. After some time Shamal heard the shout of his father "Dada Dada" that is with reference to Snehal. These two brothers also shouted for help for opening the door. Therefore the neighbours woke up and after some time the neighbours came and informed them through the window of the bathroom that nobody was opening the door from inside. Ultimately the door was opened by the mother at about 5.30 a.m. and then they found that their father was lying, they gave call but there was no response from the father, hence family doctor was called, who declared, after examination, that Laxman was dead. There were bleeding injuries on the person of Laxman. Thereafter F.I.R. was lodged against unknown persons. 5-Y. STORY DISCLOSED IN DEFENCE BY ACCUSED NO. 1:---The third story, that is coming before the Court, is the defence raised by accused No. 1 Ranjana. This story came to be given by her in her written statement tendered to the Court under section 233(2) of the Cri.P.C. It is like this. That on the fateful night two persons and a woman, all cladding burkha, came in the house, they forced her to take the children to the bathroom and thereafter they beat Laxman to death. Ranjana the accused No. 1 was made to sit in the kitchen and forced to see the brutal assault. That on the fateful night two persons and a woman, all cladding burkha, came in the house, they forced her to take the children to the bathroom and thereafter they beat Laxman to death. Ranjana the accused No. 1 was made to sit in the kitchen and forced to see the brutal assault. She was helpless and had no alternative but to watch her husband being murdered and when they left she opened the door of the bathroom in the morning at 5.30 a.m. and then the matter was reported to the police. 6. It is in this background that both the accused were tried before the trial Court. The trial Court rejected their defence and did not accept the F.I.R. but accepted the prosecution case and convicted the accused for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 7. Obviously in the aforesaid background, the main attack of the defence was to the approach of the trial Court in rejecting the story in the F.I.R. and accepting the prosecution case being unmindful of the innumerable contradictions, omissions and improvements made by prosecution witness Shamal. Both the Advocates for the accused, therefore, strongly urged that the approach of the trial Court was totally wrong and when it was found that the prosecution was deviating from its case that is made out in the F.I.R. and this deviation was on the major and material aspects, then the entire prosecution was liable to be rejected. Our attention was drawn particularly to the evidence of Shamal, which, according to the defence, was full of improvements, contradictions and omissions on all the material aspects of the case. 8. Another important submission of the defence was that if on the rejection of the prosecution case after its comparison with the F.I.R., accused No. 1 has given plausible explanation as to what had happened in the fateful night in her statement under section 233(2) of the Cri.P.C., then the same explanation was liable to be accepted. The cumulative effect which would be nothing but a clear cut acquittal of the accused by setting aside the judgment of the trial Court. The cumulative effect which would be nothing but a clear cut acquittal of the accused by setting aside the judgment of the trial Court. It was also suggested with reference to the written statement of accused No. 1 that deceased Laxman had number of enemies including his deserted keep Shalan and, therefore, it could not be said that the present accused only were the persons having the motive to kill Laxman. 9. If the submissions of the defence that the F.I.R. is the first and last word of the prosecution and the entire evidence has to be scrutinized, assessed and accepted or rejected with reference to the F.I.R., then evidence of the prosecution witness is liable to be rejected, because obviously the prosecution case materially differs from the F.I.R. But the crucial question is, whether in the circumstances of the case, the F.I.R. can be treated as the first and last word of the prosecution and the gospel truth and our answer is obviously in the negative in the background of the case. 10. No doubt it is true that the F.I.R. carries great importance in a criminal case and generally the prosecution case is to be tested against the back drops in the F.I.R. However, this general rule cannot be made applicable universally in each and every criminal case in total disregard of the fact of the particular case. 11. The F.I.R. was lodged, in the present case, by Shamal who was 13-14 years of age at that time. It was lodged by Shamal even though he was locked in the bathroom by his mother accused No. 1. It was lodged by Shamal even though accused No. 1 was present outside the bathroom watching the incident or not watching the incident but gathering as to what was happening to her husband at the hands of those three unknown assailants, i.e. one woman and two men, who entered the house with a knowledge to her, who asked to lock the children in the bathroom, who made her to sit in the kitchen and who assaulted the deceased with a weapon like "Latan" (i.e. the wooden instrument which is used for preparing roties) and, ultimately accused No. 1 opened the door of the bathroom and brought the children outside. 12. 12. It is this background which not only creates doubt about the F.I.R. but shows that accused No. 1 was instrumental in lodging the F.I.R. which suited her motive to save her skin, in the manner in which it appears on record. In her statement under section 233(2) of the Cri.P.C. there is no explanation by her as to why she herself did not lodge the F.I.R. and used her minor son who was already frightened because of the incident or because of being locked up in the bathroom for more than 3-4 hours. In fact in her statement accused No. 1 has, at the conclusion of the trial, given all the details as to what happened on the fateful night which resulted in the death of her husband. No woman who had not played any role in the matter and who has some concern towards her children would use the children as an instrument in lodging the first complaint to the police about ghastly attack on her husband. The conduct of accused No. 1 in this regard is not only unnatural but it is unbefiting murder and, therefore, it is outright rejected. 13. From the aforesaid circumstances it is, therefore, clear that it was the mother-accused No. 1 who prompted her minor son Shamal, aged about 13-14 years, to lodge the F.I.R. in the manner in which it appeared today in the case and we have no hesitation to hold that this was her deliberate attempt to shield accused No. 2 as well as herself and to mislead the police during investigation. 14. At this juncture, it is necessary to consider the defence raised by accused No. 1 in her statement under section 233(2) of the Cri.P.C. It is true that the defence raised by the accused in a criminal case has not be proved beyond reasonable doubt. If the accused succeeds in getting benefit of doubt in the mind of the Court by his defence, then that much is sufficient in criminal trial for the accused to get the benefit of the said doubt. However, not only accused No. 1 miserably failed to create any doubt in our mind, but to the contrary the prosecution makes us believe that it is deliberately concocted and false story that is given by accused No. 1 in her defence. There are scores of improbabilities and falsities in the story. 15. However, not only accused No. 1 miserably failed to create any doubt in our mind, but to the contrary the prosecution makes us believe that it is deliberately concocted and false story that is given by accused No. 1 in her defence. There are scores of improbabilities and falsities in the story. 15. There is one more strong circumstance that falsifies the story given by accused No. 1. The deceased was murdered by a hard and blunt object like "Latan". If three assailants, one woman and two men, had come there with an intention of killing her husband, they would have come with their own weapons and would not have used the instrument like "Latan" for killing the deceased. Further she had ample opportunities to know their height, their colour, the language in which they were speaking. But she did not give any clue in this regard to the police and to the contrary made her son Shamal to lodge the F.I.R. 16. The natural consequence of all these findings and the conclusions is that accused No. 1, right from the beginning, was trying to protect her paramour accused No. 2, that she was also trying to mislead the police during investigation by lodging the F.I.R. through Shamal even knowing fully well that it was totally false and incorrect narration of the incident, she has shown courage to raise such defence before the Court by giving her statement under section 233(2) of the Cri.P.C. 17. The another falsity in the defence of accused No. 1 is that, according to her, she took her children and daughter-in-law in the bathroom and the children closed the door from inside and she did not bolt the door from outside. It is pertinent to note that accused No. 1 does not say that the so called assailants or any of them had bolted the door of the bathroom from outside. If at all the children had bolted the door from inside and it was not bolted from outside, then nothing prevented the children from coming out of the bathroom at least when deceased Laxman called "Dada Dada" for help. Secondly, Snehal had stated that he had called the neighbours for help and two neighbours came near the bathroom. Snehal told them to go and open the door or the bathroom. These talks took place through the window of the bathroom. Secondly, Snehal had stated that he had called the neighbours for help and two neighbours came near the bathroom. Snehal told them to go and open the door or the bathroom. These talks took place through the window of the bathroom. The neighbours went to the front of the bungalow of deceased Laxman, pushed the call bell, but there was no response, therefore, they came back frustrated and told the children that nobody was opening the door. If at all the children had bolted the door of the bathroom from inside and it was not bolted from outside, then there was no necessity for the children to call the neighbours, and in any case, if at all, the neighbours were called for help and neighbours had come accordingly, the children would have gained courage and would have come out by taking this opportunity. For these reasons, it has to be held that the statement of accused No. 1 that she had not bolted the door of the bathroom from outside, is false. 18. Thirdly, accused No. 1, in her statement, does not say as to in what manner those three assailants killed her husband. The sketch map shows that the house is only a three room house, and not a very big house. Admittedly, when assaulted Laxman was shouting for help, accused No. 1 was made to sit in the next room and it is impossible to accept that even in spite of this brutal attack on the deceased (who had more than a dozen of injuries on his person), accused No. 1 would not even try to find out why and in what manner her husband was being assaulted or murdered. 19. The fourth falsity in the statement of accused No. 1 is that she no where states as to when the assailants left, how much time elapsed before she opened the door of the bathroom at 5.30 a.m., why she did not shout even thereafter, why she did not collect the neighbours or others for help. 19. The fourth falsity in the statement of accused No. 1 is that she no where states as to when the assailants left, how much time elapsed before she opened the door of the bathroom at 5.30 a.m., why she did not shout even thereafter, why she did not collect the neighbours or others for help. There is not explanation from accused No. 1 anywhere, either in her statement or the suggestions put to the prosecution witnesses as to why the assailants spared her or did not attack her, why she was not forced to or closed in the bathroom, why the assailants wanted her to witness the incident and last and most danger circumstance against accused No. 1 is that there is no explanation from her as to why she preferred prosecution witness Shamal, a boy of 13 years of age, to lodge the report to the police and why she did not herself lodge the report to the police or to take any initiative in that regard. All these circumstances, therefore, show that the defence raised by accused No. 1 is totally false, bogus and liable to be outright rejected. 20. Raising of such type of defence, which on the face of it is false and blatant lies, creates strong suspicion and circumstance against the accused. It also shows that the defence was raised with an ulterior motive and that is to save her skin as well as of accused No. 2. It is pertinent to note that according to accused No. 1, there was bacha-bachi between those three unknown assailants and her husband i.e. the exchange of hot words between them. She did not say what was the subject that was discussed or over which the hot exchange of words took place because that could have given her clue as to the reason of assault on her husband by three unknown persons. 21. In these circumstances it has to be held that the F.I.R. lodged by Shamal cannot be accepted in this case as the first and last word of the prosecution nor the evidence of P.W. Nos. 1 and 2 can be scrutinized and assessed with reference to the F.I.R. The prosecution case has to be with reference to the evidence given by these two witnesses and the circumstances that are brought on record, regarding the motive and conduct of accused Nos. 1 and 2 can be scrutinized and assessed with reference to the F.I.R. The prosecution case has to be with reference to the evidence given by these two witnesses and the circumstances that are brought on record, regarding the motive and conduct of accused Nos. 1 and 2, and the incident and happenings prior to the murder and after the murder. The F.I.R. is full of falsity at the instance of accused No. 1 as she had taken advantage of her relationship with Shamal as a mother and also taken advantage of his minor and tendered age at the relevant time and mental condition in which the children came out of the bathroom on that fateful night. 22. Now it is in this background that the case of the prosecution has to be assessed. Not much importance can be given to the so called contradictions in the evidence of Shamal. These contradictions are bound to be there because Shamal was made to lodge the F.I.R. as desired and wished by accused No. 1. We are, therefore, in total disagreement with the submissions of the Advocates for the accused that the prosecution case is liable to be rejected because of variation, omissions, contradictions and improvements with reference to the F.I.R. 23. The next submission of Mr. More was that there is no evidence at all adduced by the prosecution to prove the illicit relations between accused No. 1 and accused No. 2. It is a known fact that the illicit relations, as such, are difficult to be proved by any amount of evidence. Whether relations of male or female were illicit relations will depend on the facts and circumstances of the case and also will depend upon the relations between the parties, their conduct prior to and subsequent to the incident and also the conduct vis-a-vis the witnesses who could depose about those relations. 24. It is significant to note that in this regard we questioned both the Advocates for the accused as to why to none of the prosecution witnesses, a single suggestion was put by and on behalf of accused No. 1 regarding denial of any kind of illicit relations between accused No. 1 and accused No. 2. 24. It is significant to note that in this regard we questioned both the Advocates for the accused as to why to none of the prosecution witnesses, a single suggestion was put by and on behalf of accused No. 1 regarding denial of any kind of illicit relations between accused No. 1 and accused No. 2. Even in the statement under section 313 of the Cri.P.C. accused No. 2, who had full opportunity to explain the circumstances appeared against him in the evidence, does not utter a word about his relationship with accused No. 1. On every question put to him regarding prosecution case, his answer is that the question is false or what is asked to him is false or what is appeared in the evidence is false. Even the last question is whether he has to say anything more about the prosecution case or against the prosecution case, his answer is he would produce certain documents. There is, therefore, no denial whatsoever from accused No. 2 of his illicit relationship with accused No. 1, and this becomes strong circumstance against accused No. 2 and also against accused No. 1, so far as this aspect of the prosecution case is concerned. 25. Apart from this, there is ample evidence on record to suggest and infer sufficient to give strong motive to both the accused to commit murder of Laxman that they were having illicit relationship. It is pertinent to note that accused No. 1 has produced certain documents on record which include copy of the order passed by J.M.F.C. in the proceedings under section 125 of the Cri.P.C. initiated at the instance of accused No. 1 against her husband Laxman. From the said judgment, it is clear that it has been the case of deceased Laxman that accused No. 1 was having illicit relations with accused No. 2 and she used to go with him disregarding her marital duties. According to Laxman, it was the accused No. 1 who has deserted him because of her illicit relationship with accused No. 2. 26. According to Laxman, it was the accused No. 1 who has deserted him because of her illicit relationship with accused No. 2. 26. It is irrelevant that whether this defence of Laxman was accepted by the Magistrate, but what is relevant for the purpose of this case is, whether the prosecution succeeds in making out a case that the illicit relations between accused No. 1 and accused No. 2 was the reason for the murder of Laxman, and the stand taken by Laxman in the proceedings under section 125 is the material circumstance and material piece of evidence in that regard. 27. Apart from this, there is positive and concrete evidence of Snehal and Shamal about the illicit relationship between accused No. 1 and accused No. 2. The evidence or Shamal was tried to be attacked by the Counsel for the accused on the ground that whatever Shamal has stated in the F.I.R. about the said relationship or about the visit of accused No. 1 to the house of accused No. 2 is not found place in the F.I.R. We have already observed that in this case the evidence of Shamal cannot be rejected merely on the ground that it is not in conformity with the F.I.R. or that there are scores of contradictions and omissions in the evidence of Shamal and in the F.I.R. At least so far as this relationship is concerned, Shamal's evidence can be accepted because that is the stand taken by Laxman in the proceedings under section 125 of the Cri.P.C. Shamal was 15 years of age when his evidence was recorded. He has stated that his mother left their house three and half years prior to the incident, that accused No. 2 used to visit their house and then accused No. 1 left the house along with accused No. 2. He has repeated his allegation that his mother was residing with accused No. 2. P.W. 9 Snehal, who is elder amongst two brothers, has stated that there were cordial relations between his mother and Karim accused No. 2, that his mother used to wander with Karim, that after 5-6 months his mother left them and went along with Karim. He has repeated his allegation that his mother was residing with accused No. 2. P.W. 9 Snehal, who is elder amongst two brothers, has stated that there were cordial relations between his mother and Karim accused No. 2, that his mother used to wander with Karim, that after 5-6 months his mother left them and went along with Karim. This evidence coupled with the stand taken by deceased Laxman in the proceedings under section 125 of the Cri.P.C., in our opinion, is sufficient to prove that there were illicit relations between accused No. 1 and accused No. 2. This is apart from the fact that neither accused No. 2, in his statement recorded under section 313 of the Cri.P.C., has denied those allegations specifically nor he has given any explanation as to why the children Shamal and Snehal were alleging the illicit relations between him and their mother. About this, apart from the fact that even though prosecution witnesses Shamal and Snehal were cross-examined at length, there is nothing to discard their evidence. We have already observed that the evidence of Shamal cannot be rejected in its entirety because it is not consistent with the F.I.R. or it is contrary to the F.I.R. Therefore, for all these reasons, we are unable to agree with the submission of Mr. More and Advocate for accused No. 2 that the prosecution has failed to establish the illicit relations. Admittedly, this is not a civil case but a criminal case and the illicit relations are to be prove only for the purpose of establishing a motive. If the fact of murder is independently proved, then motive may not assume that importance but if in addition to the fact of murder, the prosecution adduces evidence of alleged motive, then in the circumstances of the case, it has to be held that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the illicit relations between the accused No. 1 and accused No. 2. 28. It was contended by Mr. More that even from the evidence that has come on record it was possible that many other persons could have killed deceased Laxman. Our attention in that regard was invited to the evidence of Snehal who has stated that accused No. 1 was also alleged to have illicit relations with one Sikandar Pathan and also with one more person. More that even from the evidence that has come on record it was possible that many other persons could have killed deceased Laxman. Our attention in that regard was invited to the evidence of Snehal who has stated that accused No. 1 was also alleged to have illicit relations with one Sikandar Pathan and also with one more person. This Court has not to decide whether accused No. 1 had illicit relations with many persons. The question is whether she had illicit relations with accused No. 2 and the murder came to be committed on account of those relations. Therefore, even though there were hundreds of enemies of deceased Laxman, this case has to be decided as against accused No. 1 and accused No. 2, and if the evidence against them is sufficient, the conviction has to be upheld and, if the evidence is deficient, they are required to be acquitted. 29. It was one of the main submissions of Mr. More that the case against both the accused was false and fabricated by the police. In support of his submission, he contended that the copy of the F.I.R. was sent to the Magistrate on 4th October, 1995 when the F.I.R. was registered on 30th September, 1995. He further submitted that the statements of important witnesses, Shamal and Snehal, were antedated and this was done with a view to instigate the children to depose against their mother and thereby falsely implicate both the accused. We do not find any substance in this submission. The copy of the F.I.R. that was sent to the Magistrate is on record. It is the same F.I.R. lodged by Shamal. If at all the police wanted to fabricate the document, this F.I.R. could have been suppressed by the police and the F.I.R. of Shamal could have been taken by them. Admittedly, this has not been done. Secondly, there is no force in the submission that the statements of prosecution witness Shamal and Snehal were antedated. Firstly, the Investigating Officer has flatly denied this suggestion and secondly if at all Snehal made  his statement on 1st October, 1995 and then it was recorded by the police, there was no reason for the police to arrest both the accused on 30th September, 1995, because the F.I.R. did not point out any finger towards the accused. Firstly, the Investigating Officer has flatly denied this suggestion and secondly if at all Snehal made  his statement on 1st October, 1995 and then it was recorded by the police, there was no reason for the police to arrest both the accused on 30th September, 1995, because the F.I.R. did not point out any finger towards the accused. No witness had come forward to state that these accused were responsible for the murder. Therefore, there was no reason for the police to arrest the accused on the night of 30th September, 1995 itself. Only reason, therefore, for their arrest is the statement of Shamal which was recorded on the same day. 30. Mr. More also tried to contend that as per the evidence of Snehal and Shamal both of them had left the village and had gone to Visapur at about 3.00 p.m. in the afternoon when the body of Laxman was handed over to them and according to these witnesses they returned after performing the last rites of Laxman at about 9.30 p.m. Mr. More also pointed out that Snehal has admitted in his cross-examination that his statement was recorded on 1-10-95, when according to the Investigating Officer the statement of Snehal was recorded on 30th September, 1995 and when the circumstances indicate that his statement was recorded on 30th September, 1995, then for the reasons stated above, this admission of Snehal that his statement was recorded on 1-10-95 cannot destroy the case of the prosecution. 31. So far as the evidence of Snehal is concerned, even though the same was tried to be challenged on different ground it has to be held that the defence has completely failed to achieve any success in that regard. Snehal is consistent in his evidence. He has given clear picture about his mother's illicit relations with Karim and he has also given clear picture as to what happened on the day of the incident, how Karim came there and how his mother went to see Karim on that day in spite of his opposition. There is nothing in the cross-examination of Snehal from which his evidence can be said to be suspicious and liable to be rejected. The trial Court has appreciated all the evidence in proper perspective. Mr. There is nothing in the cross-examination of Snehal from which his evidence can be said to be suspicious and liable to be rejected. The trial Court has appreciated all the evidence in proper perspective. Mr. More also tried to contend that the evidence of two neighbours is of no help to the prosecution case because they do not speak anything about the accused. It is true that these two neighbours do not say anything about the accused, but they corroborate the case of Snehal and Shamal strongly to the effect that Snehal and Shamal called them for help through the window of the bathroom when they were closed in the bathroom, that the door of the bathroom was bolted from outside, that the neighbours, on request of Shamal and Snehal, tried to enter in the house, they pushed the call bell, but did not receive any response and they returned back. This corroboration strongly support the prosecution case. So far as death of Laxman is concerned, there is no doubt in our mind that Laxman died homicidal death. Dr. Shrivastav (P.W. 6) noticed 12 injuries on the person of Laxman and he opined that all the injuries were ante mortem and the death must have caused because of shock and haemorrhage from multiple contusion. It was suggested that the contusion, abrasion and laceration can be because of fall. But the Doctor rightly denied the suggestion that they could be caused in this particular case. 32. The prosecution has also relied upon recovery of blood stained clothes of accused No. 2 at his instance under section 27 of the Evidence Act on the basis of Exhibits 38 and 39. Exhibit 38 is the statement of accused No. 2 under section 27 of the Evidence Act leading to the discovery and Exhibit 39 is the spot panchnama. Exhibit 39 shows that three clothes were recovered at the instance of accused No. 2 which were kept in a cooker in the kitchen or in the room. These clothes were, one shirt having blood stains, one full pant having blood stains on the right leg side and another shirt of which four out of six buttons were missing. However, according to Mr. These clothes were, one shirt having blood stains, one full pant having blood stains on the right leg side and another shirt of which four out of six buttons were missing. However, according to Mr. More, even though panchnama Exhibit 39 mentions that the blood stains were found on the right leg side, the C.A. report shows that the blood stains were noted on the left leg side, and therefore, according to him, this recovery cannot be used as a circumstance against the accused. We find some substance in this submission because there is no explanation in this regard from the Investigation Officer. However, on the Shirt Article 30, which was recovered at the instance of the accused, there is a human blood for which there is no explanation. 33. This accused No. 1 in her statement tried to show that she was a "Sati-Savitri" of Kaliyug. She was performing whatsoever Pooja and even though the husband was having extra marital relations with one Shalan she was observing her Pativrata Dharm. However, her conduct on the night of the incident does not support her contention. As per post-mortem report, there were 12 injuries on the body of deceased Laxman. All were contusion and lacerated wounds caused by hard and blunt object. It is clear that Laxman was brutally killed. If accused No. 1, as pleaded by her, was Sati-Savitri, she would not have remained idle while her husband was being so brutally assaulted. She would have done something to protect him or to prevent the assailants, particularly, when she was not closed in the bathroom by the three assailants. However, there is not a scratch on her body nor she has any explanation to offer why she did not do anything to protect her husband or to prevent the assailants, that she was frightened and unable even to watch by lifting her eye-lips is absolutely bogus and false statement. Snehal has stated that when their family Doctor came and examined Laxman, the family doctor told that Laxman had died 4-5 hours back. Snehal has stated that when their family Doctor came and examined Laxman, the family doctor told that Laxman had died 4-5 hours back. The Doctor had come to the scene at about 7.30 a.m. which means that Laxman had died sometime between 2.30 a.m. to 3.30 a.m. If at all those three assailants had come to kill Laxman, they would admittedly leave the place after their task was accomplished and if that is so there is no explanation why this lady accused No. 1, posing her as Sati-Savitri, did not open the door up to 5.30 a.m. This not only shows that her defence is totally false but it also shows that she allowed her husband to die in agony and pain and she did not want anybody to come to his rescue or to save him. She, therefore, waited till she confirmed that the husband was dead, that accused No. 2 had reached at a safe place and then only at 5.30 a.m. she opened the door. 34. Considering therefore all the circumstances, it has to be held that this is a full-proof case against both the accused even though there are no eye-witnesses. The circumstances brought on record point out only these two accused as guilty of murder of Laxman. There is no lacuna in the investigation nor any attempt to falsely implicate the accused as suggested by the defence. The evidence of the children coupled with the medical evidence, the evidence of two neighbours and the falsity in the defence raised, leave no manner of doubt that accused No. 1 and accused No. 2 committed murder of Laxman. There is no reason for us to interfere with the judgment and the order of conviction. Hence we pass the following order :- ORDER Both the appeals are dismissed. The judgment and the order of conviction of the trial Court is upheld. Appeals dismissed. -----