ORDER Appellant has been convicted by the trial Court for the murder of his brother-in-law and was sentenced to imprisonment for life and the High Court confirmed the conviction and sentence. This appeal is by special leave. The appellant is alleged to have beaten the deceased on the head with a spade around 10.00 P.M. on 10.1.1988. PW 7, the doctor who conducted the autopsy found that the skull of the deceased was smashed and the brain material protruded out. The wife of the deceased lodged an FIR. She was not an eye-witness. She said that the incident happened in the house of the appellant. PW 2 is the son of the deceased. He was examined as eye-witness. PW 3, PW 4 and PW 5 were examined for proving that the appellant had confessed to them on his way to the police station that he killed his brother-in-law, the deceased. The trial court and the High Court placed reliance on the evidence of PW 2 to PW 5. Mr. M. Qamaruddin, learned counsel appointed as Amicus Curiae for the appellant pointed out some contradictions. First is that PW 2 was not described as an eye-witness in the FIR; second is that regarding the exact spot at which the appellant had confessed to the three witnesses there is some discrepancy between the testimony of the three witnesses. We have considered the impact of those contradictions and discrepancies but we are of the view that they are not enough to disrupt the findings made by the trial Court and the High Court regarding the reliability of the testimony of those witnesses. We, therefore, confirm the conviction and sentence and dismiss this appeal. Appeal dismissed. ************* Parallel Citations of other Journals : Raban Murmu v. State of West Bengal, 2001(8) Supreme 517 00020