JUDGMENT Lakshman Uraon, J.-The sole appellant Suna Manjhi alias Sona Ram Manjhi has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 26th February, 1993, passed by Shri Dilip Kumar Sinha, learned 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Singhbhum West at Chaibasa, in Sessions Trial No. 587 of 1989, whereby and whereunder, he has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. The prosecution case, as per the statement of the informant Smt. Fulo Manjhian (PW 3), wife of deceased Shim Manjhi, is that on the previous Saturday i.e. on 6.8.19?9 in the evening there was some altercation regarding boundary of the land in between appellant Suna Manjhi and her husband Shim Manjhi. On 7.8.1989 at about 12 noon at Village Sanjhar, Police Station-Raj Nagar, the informant and her husband were taking meal. Her husband had finished taking meal and after washing his hands, was proceeding towards the informant. In the meantime, appellant Suna Manjhi of the same village having a Tangi from his house reached to the Angan of the informant and gave Tangi blows on the back of Shim Manjhi, resulting cut injuries. Shim Manjhi fell down. Even then Suna Manjhi assaulted him with Tangi blows and murdered Shim Manjhi. The informant raised Hulla but no one came to her home. There is no house of the villagers nearby her home rather only accused appellant Suna Manjhi and his brother have got their houses. Moreover, the villagers had gone to work at their respective fields. After causing murder of Shim Manjhi, the appellant fled away, taking his Tangi. The informant went to Village-Kumarda and informed her Bhagina Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi along with whom she went to the police station and gave First Information Report at about 6.45 p.m. on the same day. 3. The prosecution has examined altogether eight witnesses in this case. PW 1 Malti and PW 2 Kunki Manjhian are closely related with PW 3 the informant Fulo Manjhian. They are the only eye witnesses of the alleged occurrence. PW 4 Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi is the Bhagina of the informant, who is hearsay witness. PW 5 Vijay Mahto is a tendered witness. PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto is a seizure list witness. PW 7 is Dr. They are the only eye witnesses of the alleged occurrence. PW 4 Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi is the Bhagina of the informant, who is hearsay witness. PW 5 Vijay Mahto is a tendered witness. PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto is a seizure list witness. PW 7 is Dr. Arun Kumar Gupta, who has conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Shim Manjhi and PW 8 Mithila Sihari Shukla is the Investigating Officer of this case. The defence has taken the alibi that at the time of the alleged occurrence, appellant was at Jamshedpur and in between 12 noon and 1.30 p.m. he received the dead body of his Bhagina Salkhan who had died at T.M.H., Jamshedpur and after receiving the dead body he took the dead body to Village home to burry it. P.W 1 Dr. Md. Masiha, P.W 2 Dr. Dina Nath Singh, P.W. 3 Jagat Ram Kermkar and P.W. 4 Prafull Kumar Sahu have been examined to prove the alibi taken by the appellant that he received the dead body of Salkhan, took it to the village and he was an employee of TISCO. 4. In the F.I.R. (Ext. 1) informant Fulo Manjhian (PW 3) had not named any other witnesses, namely, PW 1 Malti and PW 2 Kunki Manjhian as eye witnesses. PW 8 Mithila Sihari Shukla in his cross-examination has also stated that he recorded the statement of the informant and formal F.I.R. was drawn accordingly, wherein, she had not named anyone as eye witnesses of the alleged occurrence. In course of her evidence PW 3 Fulo Manjhian has deposed that she along with PW 1 Malti and PW 2 Kunki Manjhian had gone to her paddy field for transplantation. At about noon, they returned home and were taking their meal. At that time appellant Suna Manjhi brought a Tangi from his house and assaulted her husband on his head. She has stated that appellant also chased them and then they fled away to Village-Kumarda. PW 1 Malti and PW 2 Kunki Manjhian have also claimed that at about 12 noon they returned back home after working in the field of Shim Manjhi and were taking their meal in the Angan of the informant. At that very time as per the statement of PW 1 Malti, accused brought a Farsa and cut Shim Manjhi. PW 1 Malti and PW 2 Kunki Manjhian have also claimed that at about 12 noon they returned back home after working in the field of Shim Manjhi and were taking their meal in the Angan of the informant. At that very time as per the statement of PW 1 Malti, accused brought a Farsa and cut Shim Manjhi. They raised Hulla but no one of the village came to the place of occurrence. Shim Manjhi died at the spot. Shim Manjhi was the elder brother of the husband of the witness PW 1 and PW 2 Kunki Manjhian is the elder sister of the deceased Shim Manjhi. The house of PW 1 Malti is situated at the end of the village. She claims that after working they returned to the village home. First she went to her house. Thereafter both these witnesses went to take their meal in the house of Shim Manjhi. PW 1 when went to her house, met her husband and children. She had not cooked any food at her home on that day and her husband and children took no meal. All were taking their meal facing towards east. The appellant came there with a Tangi from the back side and assaulted on the neck of Shim Manjhi two or three times. On being injured Shim Manjhi fell on the Katora (bowl). Thereafter, the appellant fled away. She had informed about the alleged occurrence to her husband and his elder brother Gandur. 5. PW 2 Kunki Manjhian has claimed that the accused had also chased them and they fled away. She had stated that from the field of Shim Manjhi all the three females i.e. PWs 1, 2 and 3 came back and went straight to the house of PW 3 and were taking meal in the Angan at about 12 noon. At that very time Suna Manjhi assaulted with Tangi on the head of Shim Manjhi, resulting his death. She had stated that PW 1 Malti had also not gone to her home when they returned to take meal from the field. At that very time Suna Manjhi assaulted with Tangi on the head of Shim Manjhi, resulting his death. She had stated that PW 1 Malti had also not gone to her home when they returned to take meal from the field. Thus, she has contradicted as to whether PW 1 Malti was with them or whether she had gone to her house or not whereas Malti claims that she had gone to her house and met her husband and children and thereafter, she came to the house of PW 3 Fulo Manjhian to take meal. PW 2 claims that Shim Manjhi had also gone to the field along with them but when they returned back and went to the house of Shim Manjhi, then there was none except the four children of Shim Manjhi. The Angan is open from all sides where they were taking meal. Shim was also taking his meal. At that very time he was assaulted by appellant Suna Manjhi from behind. She has also deposed that Shim fell down on the Katora itself and out of fear the female witnesses PWs 1, 2 and 3 fled away. On their Hulla none of the villagers reached to the place of occurrence. Hence they went to Village-Kumarda and thereafter, they went to their respective homes. When this witness went to her house she did not find her husband. She never informed anyone in the village. After ten days her statement was recorded by the Investigating Officer. She has further deposed that in the Katora in which deceased Shim Manjhi was taking his food, blood had fallen down. PW 2 has further deposed that when she went to her house, she found her husband and children but PWs 1 and 3 have deposed that in the village there was none as all had gone to their respective fields for work. PW 3 also did not inform anybody in the village although PW 2 claims that her husband was in the village itself when they returned home. All the three female witnesses i.e. PWs 1, 2 and 3 did not go to any village rather PW 3 claims that she went to Village Kumarda and informed her Bhagina PW 4 Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi, which is situated at a distance of 1 km. away from her village. All the three female witnesses i.e. PWs 1, 2 and 3 did not go to any village rather PW 3 claims that she went to Village Kumarda and informed her Bhagina PW 4 Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi, which is situated at a distance of 1 km. away from her village. Although the houses of Villagers Damodar and Jongo Manjhi are very close to her house, even then she did not go to inform them. Even she did not go to inform the Village Contractor who was there in the village itself. On their Hulla all the villagers had assembled but she could not name anyone of them (Pr. 10). The villagers saw the appellant Suna Manjhi fleeing away with a Tangi towards the house of his son-in-law Lethako. She returned back home along with Kishun PW 4. They did not go to the house of PW 1 Malti and PW 2 Kunki and leaving the dead body in the house unattended, they went to the police station. The informant in para 12 has deposed that no one saw when her husband was assaulted, which she had stated before the I.O. She claimed that Katora in which the blood had fallen down was seized and taken away by the I.O. 6. On the other hand, PW 4 Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi who had gone to the police station along with PW 3, where her statement was recorded, saw the dead body in the Angan. He also found food in the Katora and he did not see any other material there. 7. PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto on Hulla that Bhim Manjhi was murdered, went to his home. He saw the dead body of Bhim Manjhi whose neck was cut with bleeding injury. The 1.0. prepared the inquest report in the carbon process on which he signed (Ext. 2) along with Sawna Manjhi (Ext. 2/1). The I.O. seized the blood stained soil and prepared seizure list on which he also signed (Ext. 2/2) and it was also signed by Sawna Manjhi (Ext. 2/3). He found the nearby villagers at the place of occurrence i.e. the Angan of the informant. This witness had not seen any Katora in which Bhim Manjhi is alleged to have been taking his food. The I.O. seized only the blood stained soil. 2/2) and it was also signed by Sawna Manjhi (Ext. 2/3). He found the nearby villagers at the place of occurrence i.e. the Angan of the informant. This witness had not seen any Katora in which Bhim Manjhi is alleged to have been taking his food. The I.O. seized only the blood stained soil. Besides that no material was seized which belied the statement of the informant and Katora in which blood had fallen down was seized. 8. PW 8 Mithila Bihari Shukla, I.O. of this case, has recorded the statement of the informant Fulo Manjhian (PW 3) on 7.8.1989 at about 4.45 a.m. Fulo Manjhian had gone there along with her Bhagina Sana Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi (PW 4). Fulo Manjhian gave her L.T.1. on which PW 4 Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi signed (Ext. 1). This witness has proved the F.I.R. in his pen and signature (Ext. 4). He prepared inquest report in presence of witness Laxmi Narayan Mahto (PW 6) in carbon process on which they signed (Ext. 5). The I.O. found the place of occurrence to be the Angan of the house of deceased Bhim Manjhi in Village Sanjhar. He found blood in abudance where the dead body was found. He seizured blood stained soil in presene of Sawna Manjhi and Laxmi Narayan Manjhi (PW 6). He prepared seizure list on which he and the witnesses signed (Ext. 6). The house of appellant Suna Ram Manjhi is towards south-east from the place of occurrence at a distance of 5 yards. The dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. He did not find any utensil which was used for taking food by the deceased and the witnesses. Only he found blood fallen down where the dead body was found. The Angan is open from all sides. 9. PW 7 Dr. Arun Kumar Gupta on 8.8.1989 at about 1.30 p.m. has conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Bhim Manjhi of Village-Sanjhar, Police Station-Raj Nagar and found the following injuries on his person: (i) Sharp cut wound 5" x 4" involving cervical bone of the neck from the backs and sides. Great vessels, cervical vertebra and nerves were cut through. (ii) Sharp cut wound 3" X 1/2" X muscle deep on the dorsum of left thumb. On dissection the doctor found that cranium and thorax were intact. Stomach and bladder were empty. Great vessels, cervical vertebra and nerves were cut through. (ii) Sharp cut wound 3" X 1/2" X muscle deep on the dorsum of left thumb. On dissection the doctor found that cranium and thorax were intact. Stomach and bladder were empty. Liver, spleen and kidneys were intact. In his opinion the cause of death was due to shock and haemorrhage due to the aforesaid injuries, within 24 hours from the time of postmortem examination. Injury no. 1 was sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. He opined that both the injuries were caused by sharp edged weapon, which may be a Tangi. He prepared postmortem examination report in his pen and signature (Ext. 3). This witness has stated that it takes about 4 to 6 hours for digesting food. After death, process of digestion stops and the undigested food particles will remain in the stomach in the same condition as at the time of death. In his opinion death should have been caused after 1.30 p.m. on 7.8.1989. 10. PWs 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 have deposed that the alleged occurrence took place in the Angan of the informant. PW 8 Mithila Bihari Shukla, the I.O., has also found the dead body in the Angan of the informant where blood had fallen down from where he seized blood stained soil. PWs 1, 2 and 3 who claim themselves to be the eye witnesses have deposed that the alleged assault with Tangi on the head of Shim Manjhi was made by appellant Suna Manjhi alias Sona Ram Manjhi at about 12 noon at the time of taking meal. The doctor Arun Kumar Gupta, who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Shim Manjhi on 8.8.1989 also opined that time elapsed since death of the post-mortem examination was within 24 hours from 1.30 p.m., which corresponds to the time of the alleged occurrence, as deposed by the witnesses PWs 1, 2 and 3. Hence the place of occurrence and time of occurrence have well been proved by the prosecution witnesses i.e. PWs 1, 2 and 3. Regarding the manner of the alleged occurrence, although PWs 1 and 2 are not named as eye witnesses in the F.I.R. (Ext. 4) but they have claimed in course of their evidence to the eye witnesses. Hence the place of occurrence and time of occurrence have well been proved by the prosecution witnesses i.e. PWs 1, 2 and 3. Regarding the manner of the alleged occurrence, although PWs 1 and 2 are not named as eye witnesses in the F.I.R. (Ext. 4) but they have claimed in course of their evidence to the eye witnesses. As such, their evidence are to be considered cautiously as they are closely related with the deceased. PW 3 Fulo Manjhian and PW2 Kunki Manjhian have claimed that after the alleged occurrence, they raised Hulla in the village but no one reached to their home. PW 1 has deposed that her husband was present in the house along with the children. PW 1 claims that after assaulting, Shim Singh, appellant Suna Ram Manjhi fled away whereas PWs 2 and 3 have stated that after causing murder of Shim Manjhi, the appellant chased them and thereafter, they fled away and went to Village Kumarda, out of fear. PW 1 claims that after the alleged occurrence she and Kunki Manjhian PW 2 went to their respective houses whereas Fulo Manjhian went to Village-Kumarda, which is situated at a distance of 1 km. away from their Village-Sanjhar. The informant in the F.I.R. has deposed that when her hus band after taking food washed his hands and was coming towards her, then he was assaulted with Tangi by the appellant. On the other hand, in course of evidence she and other witnesses PWs 1 and 2 have deposed that they were all taking food in the Angan facing towards east and from the west i.e. back side, appellant came there with a Tangi and assaulted on the head of Shim Manjhi. All of them were just taking food. Shim Manjhi fell down on the Katora in which blood also fell down. When the accused fled away, then these three witnesses, namely, PWs 1 and 2 went to their respective houses whereas PW 3 went to Village-Kumarda to inform her Bhagina PW 4 Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi. PW 1 claims that after working in the field of Shim Manjhi she along with PWs 2 and 3 returned home. Firstly they went to their respective houses and then they went to the house of Fulo Manjhian PW 3 to take their meals. PW 1 claims that after working in the field of Shim Manjhi she along with PWs 2 and 3 returned home. Firstly they went to their respective houses and then they went to the house of Fulo Manjhian PW 3 to take their meals. PW 2 claims that from the field they straightway went to the house of PW 3 Fulo Manjhian to take meal. Shim Manjhi had also gone to the field to work with them and he also returned back to take meal and was taking his meal along with them in the Angan of his house. They did not meet any villager in the village or on their way to home from the field. PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto when went to the place of occurrence i.e. Angan of the informant, then he found the villagers assembled there. After some time police also arrived there. PW 3 the informant has stated that in the village she had not informed anyone else. Even the nearby villagers, namely, Damodar and Jango, including the contractor, were not informed. Although PWs 1, 2 and 3 have deposed that there was none in the village but PW 3 informant in para 10 has deposed that on their Hulla the villagers had reached but she could not name them. She also claimed that the villagers also saw the appellant fleeing away from the place of occurrence along with Tangi who went to the house of his son-in-law, namely, Lethko. Thus, it is not clear in my mind as to whether none in the village was available m Hulla to witness the alleged occurrence. Even the villagers saw the appellant running with Tangi who went to the house of his son-in-law Lethko, who was not chased by any of the villagers. PW 3 claims that the I.O. seized the Katora in which the blood was fallen down but the I.O. PW 8 did not find any utensil or Katora in the Angan. He did not seize any Katora. PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto, seizure list witness, had also not seen any Katora in the Angan. PW 3 claims that the I.O. seized the Katora in which the blood was fallen down but the I.O. PW 8 did not find any utensil or Katora in the Angan. He did not seize any Katora. PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto, seizure list witness, had also not seen any Katora in the Angan. The alleged eye witnesses i.e. PWs 1, 2 and 3 were taking their meal along with Shim Manjhi facing towards east and from their back side, Suna Ram Manjhi came with a Tangi and assaulted on the head of Shim Manjhi while he was taking food and fell down on the Katora. This statement has been contradicted by the interested and eye witnesses itself due to non-seizure of Katora by the I.O. as stated by PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto also that he did not see any Katora. It creates doubt in my mind as to whether Shim Manjhi was assaulted by this appellant while he was taking food in a Katora along with PWs 1, 2 and 3. Village-Kumarda i.e. the village of PW 4 Son a Ram Manjhi is situated at a distance of 1 km. away from Village Sanjhar. PWs 1, 2 and 3 did not inform anyone in the village although PW 1 has stated that her husband and children were in the village home who are closely related with the informant. These interested and closely related witnesses never went to any villager to inform rather they are claiming that on Hulla no one came at the place of occurrence. This is also not clear in my mind as per the statement of PW 3 who herself has deposed in paragraphs no. 9 and 10 that all the villagers had assembled there on Hulla but she could not name any of them. Similarly PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto in para 4 has deposed that on Hulla when he went to the house of Shim Manjhi, then he found the nearby villagers assembled there. The doctor PW 7 who conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of Shim Manjhi on 8.8.1989 at 1.30 p.m. has opined that Shim Manjhi was murdered on 7.8.1989 at about 1.30 p.m. The doctor found two injuries on the head of the deceased, ante-mortem in nature caused by sharp edged weapon like Tangi and the cause of death was injury no. 1 i.e. sharp cut wound 5" X 4" involving the cervical bone of the neck from the backs and sides as also the great vessels, cervical vertebra and nerves were cut through. He found on dissection stomach and bladder empty. This shows that the deceased Shim Manjhi had not taken any food at the alleged time of occurrence, which is about noon of 7.8.1989. This fact has also been supported by the I.O. that when he went to the place of occurrence, then he did not find any Katora or utensil which was used for taking food by the deceased and the witnesses. PW 6, the seizure list witness, who is of the same village-Sanjhar, namely, Laxmi Narayan Mahto also did not see any utensil in the Angan or nearby the dead body rather he found only the dead body of Shim Manjhi in the Angan from where sufficient blood had come out on the earth where the deceased had fallen down. 11. Although the villagers had assembled on Hulla and. saw Suna Ram Manjhi fleeing away with Tangi, even then none of the villagers chased him. PW 3 has deposed that Suna Ram Manjhi fled away with. Tangi and went to the house of his son-in-law Lethko. It is not convincing to me that when Suna Ram Manjhi went with Tangi to the house of his son-in-law, he was never chased. PW 8 when went to the village, he did not find the accused in the village rather the house of the accused was locked. 12. On the other hand, the plea taken by the appellant is that at that very time he was present at Jamshedpur and had received the dead body of Salkhan, son of his relative. The defence has examined DW 1 Md. Masiha, who has deposed that on 6.8.1989 he was posted in T.M.H., Jamshedpur. He produced documents relating to Salkhan, a eight months old child, who was admitted in the T.M.H on 6.8.1989 at 17 hours. Salkhan's father was Barjo but address was given as care of Suna Manjhi as Suna Manjhi was regular employee of TISCO. Being employee of TISCO Suna Manjhi got admitted Salkhan in the T.M.H., as he was related to him. Salkhan's father was Barjo but address was given as care of Suna Manjhi as Suna Manjhi was regular employee of TISCO. Being employee of TISCO Suna Manjhi got admitted Salkhan in the T.M.H., as he was related to him. Salkhan died on 6.8.1989 at 11.15 p.m. After certification of the dead body it was not handed over in his presence rather the dead body was handed over to Sana Manjhi on 7.8.1989 at 12 noon. The certification form regarding death of Salkhan was filled in by him in his pen and signature (Ext. A). Endorsement (Ext. A/1) regarding handing over of the dead body is in the pen and signature of Dr. D.N. Singh (DW 2). DW 2 Dr. D.N. Singh has also supported the statement of DW 1 that Salkhan, a male child, was admitted at T.M.H. on 6.8.1989, who died during his treatment. The dead body was handed over on 7.8.1989 at 1.10 p.m. The certification of death form was prepared in carbon process and after verification and signature of the person, the dead body was handed over to Suna Manjhi, who signed on it under the signature of Dr. D.N. Singh (Ext. B). DW 3 Jagat Ram Karmkar has deposed that Suna Ram Manjhi is an employee of TISCO. At about 8.00 a.m. on 7.8.1989 he informed that a child of his relative died in the T.M.H., who was to be brought on scooter. This witness DW 3 went on motorcycle and managed vehicle 'Tata 407' to carry the dead body. He went to the hospital where the documents were prepared. Suna Ram Manjhi signed on the documents (Ext. B/1), which is on Ext. A/1, at about 12 noon. Thereafter, at about 1.30 p.m. the dead body was handed over to Suna Ram Manjhi. The dead body was taken on that vehicle up to the Station. Thereafter, the dead body was taken by Suna Ram Manjhi to his village for getting it burried. DW 4 Prafull Kumar Sahu is also a TISCO employee, who has deposed that Suna Ram Manjhi has got works permit to enter inside the factory. Medical Service Book, Salary Slip, Permanent Ticket numbers and Personal Number are issued to each employees. He has proved the Works Permit issued in favour of Suna Ram Manjhi (Ext. D). DW 4 Prafull Kumar Sahu is also a TISCO employee, who has deposed that Suna Ram Manjhi has got works permit to enter inside the factory. Medical Service Book, Salary Slip, Permanent Ticket numbers and Personal Number are issued to each employees. He has proved the Works Permit issued in favour of Suna Ram Manjhi (Ext. D). He has also proved the Medical Service Book of Suna Ram Manjhi, which bears the personal number and ticket number (Ext. D/1). He has also proved the salary slip of Suna Ram Manjhi (Ext. E). 13. Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that although PWs 1, 2 and 3 have claimed to be the eye witnesses but they have given contradictory statements regarding the manner of the alleged occurrence. It was also argued that PWs 1, 2 and 3 have deposed that Bhim Manjhi had taken his food is also contradicted by themselves. They have said that Shim Manjhi was just taking his food when he was given Tangi blows, resulting his death. PW. 3 in her F.I.R. (Ext. 4) has deposed that she and her husband were taking food. Her husband had finished taking meal and after washing his hands,' he was coming towards her. This shows that Bhim Manjhi had taken his complete diet and then he was given Tangi blows resulting his death. The doctor (PW 7) found the stomach of the deceased empty. The time elapsed since death from the time of post-mortem examination was 24 hours which corresponds to the time of 12 noon of 7.8.1989. PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto, a villager, did not find any Katora and so also is the statement of the I.O., PW 8. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that PWs 1 and 2 are not the eye witnesses, but they have been brought as an after thought. PW 3 has developed the prosecution story by improving the prosecution case, which she had not narrated before the I.O. in the F.I.R. (Ext. 4). Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned court below erroneously disbelieved the strong alibi taken by the appellant in course of his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. who has also produced two doctors of T.M.H., one employee of TISCO and one contractor, who provided truck to carry the dead body of Salkhan up to the Station. 4). Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the learned court below erroneously disbelieved the strong alibi taken by the appellant in course of his examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C. who has also produced two doctors of T.M.H., one employee of TISCO and one contractor, who provided truck to carry the dead body of Salkhan up to the Station. On these grounds, it was submitted that due to enmity as there was dispute regarding land with the deceased and the father of this appellant, the appellant has been implicated in this case falsely. 14. Learned A.P.P. in course of argument has submitted that there is minor contradictions in the statements of the eye witnesses only because they are rustic village women. It was submitted that the I.O. had not taken prompt steps in investigating the case by going to the T.M.H. and examining the documents there. The learned court below has rightly disbelieved the defence version and has convicted the sole appellant, sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life. 15. When considered meticulously the evidences of PWs 1, 2 and 3, I find that PW 1 Malti and PW 2 Kunki Manjhian are related closely with PW 3 Fulo Manjhian. They had gone to work in the field of Shim Manjhi. At about noon all the three witnesses along with Shim Manjhi returned home to take meal. They did not meet any villager on their way while going and coming or working in the field. Malti PW 1 claimed that first she went to her house and saw her husband and children. They remained without food on that day as she had not cooked any food at her home. Thereafter, she went to the house of Fulo Manjhian (PW 3) along with PW 2 Kunki Manjhian. Kunki Manjhian PW 2 has deposed that all the three returned straight way to the house of Fulo Manjhian without going to their respective houses and were taking meal along with Shim Manjhi. They claimed that they were taking meal in Katoras. On being assaulted Shim Manjhi fell down on the Katora. There was blood in the Katora and also on the ground where he fell down. This does not get support by the village independent witness PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto, who did not find any Katara there in the Angan. They claimed that they were taking meal in Katoras. On being assaulted Shim Manjhi fell down on the Katora. There was blood in the Katora and also on the ground where he fell down. This does not get support by the village independent witness PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto, who did not find any Katara there in the Angan. So also the statement of PW 3 that Katara was seized by the I.O. is belied by the I.O. PW 8 who has deposed that he did not find any utensil (Katara) and, therefore, he did not seize any Katara. The presence of the villagers at the place of occurrence after the alleged occurrence has also been admitted by the informant (PW 3). On the other hand, PW 3 claims that when Suna Ram Manjhi appellant chased them, out of fear, they fled away. Soth PWs 1 and 2 went to their respective homes but she (PW 3) went to the Village-Kumarda and informed her Bhagina PW 4 Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi. PW 8 when came to the village on that very day, he did not find appellant Suna Ram Manjhi in the village rather his house was locked. PW 3 has deposed that Suna Ram Manjhi tied away with Tangi and went to the house of his son-in-law Lethko. As per the statement of PW 3 Fulo Manjhi and PW 6 Laxmi Narayan Mahto, a number of villagers had assembled in the house of Fulo Manjhian, who saw appellant Suna Ram Manjhi fleeing away. This shows that the villagers were very much present in the village at the time of the alleged occurrence. Even then PWs 1, 2 and 3 did not inform any of the villagers about the alleged occurrence rather PWs 1 and 2 went to their respective houses whereas PW 3 went to village-Kumarda. The act of these female witnesses, namely, PWs 1, 2 and 3 is quite contradictory to each other and beyond the human conduct, as they did not inform anybody else although a number of villagers had assembled at the place of occurrence after the alleged occurrence. It is also clear that the villagers saw appellant running away with Tangi but they did not chase him. It is also clear that the villagers saw appellant running away with Tangi but they did not chase him. This creates doubt in the prosecution case as alleged against this sole appellant, who claims that on 7.8.1989 he was present at Jamshedpur, which is 35 kms. away from Village-Sanjhar. On that day at 12 noon he received the dead body of Salkhan a child aged about 8 months, under his signature (Ext. B/1). The signature of Suna Manjhi on Death Certificate Form (Ext. C) also bears his signature showing that at about 12 noon on 7.8.1989 he signed the form and the dead body was taken away at 1.10 p.m. Ext. B/1 is the service book of Suna Ram Manjhi which also bears his signature. The signatures of appellant Suna Ram Manjhi on these documents, as compared with his signature as signed by him in his statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. in Court on 18.9.1991, tally with each other without any doubt. The signatures of Suna Ram Manjhi on these documents have not been challenged by the prosecution. The learned court below has wrongly disbelieved the strong alibi taken by the appellant Suna Ram Manjhi that he was not present at Village Sanjhar at the time of the alleged occurrence and thereafter also, which is very clear from the evidence of PW 3 itself that ha fled away wi1h Tangi and went to his son-in-law's house. Non chasing and non-apprehending of the appellant Suna Ram Manjhi by any of the villagers shows that the statement of PW 3 that Suna Ram Manjhi fled away towards the house of his son-in-law could not be corroborated. She has herself contradicted that when Suna Ram Manjhi assaulted her husband resulting his death, then out of fear PWs 1, 2 and 3 fled away from the house. Later on she came back to her home along with Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi and Ganesh. The I.O. recorded her statement and thereafter, he searched the accused. He did not find the accused in the village nor in the house as his house was locked. Later on she came back to her home along with Sona Ram Manjhi alias Kishun Marandi and Ganesh. The I.O. recorded her statement and thereafter, he searched the accused. He did not find the accused in the village nor in the house as his house was locked. This further strengthens the defence alibi that Suna Ram Manjhi had gone to T.M.H. at Jamshedpur and received the dead body of Salkhan on 7.8.1989 at 12 noon to whom the dead body was handed over at about 1.10 p.m. He took the dead body on a truck, managed by DW 3, upto the station. Thereafter, it is not clear as to when the dead body was taken to the village Sanjhar for burying. All these evidences clearly support the defence version that Suna Ram Manjhi was not present at ViIlage-Sanjhar at about 12 noon on 7.8.1989 when Bhim Manjhi, husband of the informant PW 3, was done to death by sharp cutting weapon like Tangi on his head. 16. In view of my above considered facts, oral as well as documentary, the prosecution case is full of doubt and the benefit of doubt must go to the accused appellant. The doubtful prosecution case alleging against the sole appellant has further been confirmed by producing documents from T.M.H., including service book of the appellant from the TISCO as also by examining DWs 1 and 2, who are doctors posted at T.M.H. and who are acquainted with the admission and death of Salkhan, an eight months child, who was admitted under the care of this appellant Suna. Ram Manjhi, as he is an employee of TISCO, on 6.8: 1989 at 17 hours. On that very day at about 11.15 p.m. the child died. As it was late in the night, hence the Death Certification documents were prepared on the next day i.e. 7.8.1989. DW 3 was informed in the morning on 7.8.1989 by Suna Ram Manjhi to arrange a scooter to carry the dead body up to the station. DW 3 went on his motorcycle to the hospital where documents regarding release of the dead body were prepared at about noon on 7.8.1989 and the dead body was handed over at about 1.10 p.m. Thereafter, the dead body was taken on a vehicle 'Tata 407' up to the station. DW 3 went on his motorcycle to the hospital where documents regarding release of the dead body were prepared at about noon on 7.8.1989 and the dead body was handed over at about 1.10 p.m. Thereafter, the dead body was taken on a vehicle 'Tata 407' up to the station. As informed, from station Suna Ram Manjhi took the dead body to the village to bury it. The 1.0. has not properly investigated this case by examining the TISCO documents as also searching the documents at T.M.H Jamshedpur and searching him in the village, which might be that it was at late hours when the dead body was brought from Jamshedpur to Village Sanjhar to bury it. That is why the I.O. PW 8 could not trace out the appellant Suna Ram Manjhi on that day when he had gone to the P.O. village in course of investigation. 17. In the result, I find that the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, passed by the learned court below, against the sole appellant, cannot be sustained. I, accordingly, find merit in this appeal, which is accordingly, allowed and the judgment and order of conviction and sentence, passed against the sole appellant, are hereby set aside. As the appellant is on bail, he is discharged from the liability of bail bonds, furnished in this case. Vishnudeo Narayan, J.-I agree.