Judgment SHIV KUMAR SHARMA, J. ( 1 ) THIS criminal appeal by accused appellants Ram Swaroop and Krishna Kumar arises out of the judgment and order dated 7-8-98 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge Jhunjhunu, thereby convicting them for offence under Section 302 read with Sec. 34, IPC and sentencing each of them to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000. 00, in default of payment of fine, each to further undergo 3 months simple imprisonment. ( 2 ) SUCCINCTLY stated the facts leading to this appeal are that on 7-9-97, PW-1 Suwa Puri lodged a written report at Police Station, Nawalgarh, alleging therein that on 7-9-97 at 4. 30 p. m. his son Ramniwas was going for dinner in the mel of Keshar Bhat in the jeep of Sadhu Ram and one Lalu Ram was also accompanying them. Since there was no way to cover further distance by jeep, they left the jeep in Jondi and proceeded on feet. When they reached near the field of Sultanpuri, the accused appellants along with Fooldi and Bhanwari came there and stopped them. As per the report, Krishna, Ram Swaroop and Bhanwari had dharias in their hands, while Phuldi had a Gandasi. On the request with folded hands having been made by Sadhu Ram, the accused replied that they have no concern with him and that they will kill Ram Niwas. In the meantime, Ram Niwas escaped from the scene. But the accused persons chased him and caught him and then belaboured him mercilessly. Having felt that Ram Niwas has died, the accused persons ran away. The complainant stated that after the accused left the place, his son went to the house of Chauth Puri which was situated nearby and then he was called upon. When the complainant reached the house of Chauthmal, he was informed of the incident by his son. The complainant took her son to the police station and lodged the report. At that time, his son was unconscious. On the above written report, police registered a case for offence under Sections 341, 307, 323 and 324, I. P. C. vide FIR No. 282/97 (Ex. P-2) and proceeded with the investigation. Injured Ram Niwas was medically examined in Government Hospital, Sikar by PW-17 Dr. Govind Ram Tanwar, who found as many as 19 injuries vide Injury Report, Ex. P-16. On the above written report, police registered a case for offence under Sections 341, 307, 323 and 324, I. P. C. vide FIR No. 282/97 (Ex. P-2) and proceeded with the investigation. Injured Ram Niwas was medically examined in Government Hospital, Sikar by PW-17 Dr. Govind Ram Tanwar, who found as many as 19 injuries vide Injury Report, Ex. P-16. Out of 19 injuries, 10 were caused by sharp edged weapon, while rest were caused by blunt object. Having seen the condition of injured, he was referred to SMS Hospital, Jaipur for treatment, where he succumbed to injuries on 11-9-97. Thereafter, the police added Section 302, I. P. C. In the course of investigation, the police prepared the site plan, Ex. P-3 and seized bloodstained soil and collected soil vide means Ex. P-4 and P-5. The police also prepared the inquest report Ex. P-14 and got conducted autopsy on the dead body by PW-18, Dr. M. D. Qureshi and collected post-mortem report Ex. P-17. Accused Ram Swaroop and Krishna Kumar were arrested vide memos Ex. P-7 and P-8. Accused Ram Swaroop and Krishna Kumar furnished information Exs. P-18 and P-19 respectively under Sec. 27 of the Evidence Act regarding recovery of Dharia. Pursuant to their information, the police recovered dharia from each of the accused vide recovery memos, Ex. P-11 and P-12, respectively. The Police also recorded the statements of witnesses under Sec. 161, Cr. P. C. ( 3 ) HAVING completed investigation as against the present appellants, the police submitted a charge-sheet in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawalgarh on 21-11-1997 and kept pending investigation against other accused persons as provided by Section 173 (8), Cr. P. C. The learned Magistrate, having found the case exclusively triable by the Court of Session, committed the case to the Court of Session Judge. The case came to be tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu. The trial Court on the basis of evidence and material collected during investigation and placed before it and after hearing arguments of counsel for the parties, framed charges against the appellants for offence under Sec. 302/34, I. P. C. The appellants denied the charges and claimed trial. ( 4 ) IN the course of trial, the prosecution, in support of its case examined as many as 20 witnesses and got exhibited numerous documents. ( 4 ) IN the course of trial, the prosecution, in support of its case examined as many as 20 witnesses and got exhibited numerous documents. After examining prosecution witnesses, the accused were examined under Section 313, Cr. P. C. The accused did not examine any witness in their defence. At the conclusion of trial, the learned trial Court found the charge duly established against the appellants and accordingly convicted and sentenced them in the manner stated hereinabove. Hence this appeal against conviction and sentence. ( 5 ) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the impugned judgment and the evidence and material on record. The prosecution has examined in all 20 witnesses, out of which 4 witnesses, namely PW-2 Sadhu Ram, PW-3 Lal Chand, PW-5 Arjun Puri and PW-15 Navrang Puri have claimed themselves to have witnessed the incident. Before proceeding further, we would like to have reappraisal of the evidence of eye-witnesses. ( 6 ) IN his deposition Sadhu Ram (PW-2) stated that while he was going in his jeep to attend the dinner in the mel hosted by Keshar Bhat, he gave lift to Lalu Ram Jat and Ram Niwas. As jeep could go only till johd they got down from the jeep and proceeded on foot. When they reached near the field of Ganesh Jat, they found Ram Swaroop, Krishna and Phooldi, telling as to where were they going with the thief. Ram Swaroop and Krishna were armed with dharias whereas Phooldi was having Gandasi. He requested them with folded hands not to do anything. In the meanwhile Ram Niwas started running but was caught and belaboured by the accused. Krishna inflicted Dharia blow on the head of Ram Niwas. On being threatened by the accused he and Lalu rushed towards his jeep. One Bhanwari alias Sevli hit Gandasi on the jeep. ( 7 ) LAL Chand (PW-3) deposed that while he and Ram Niwas were going to attend dinner organised by Keshar Bhat, Ram Swaroop, Krishna and Phooldi met them on the way. They were armed with Dharias and Gandasi. Krishna gave Dharia blow which hit the left hand of Ram Niwas, Ram Niwas started running but fell down and the accused belaboured him. They were armed with Dharias and Gandasi. Krishna gave Dharia blow which hit the left hand of Ram Niwas, Ram Niwas started running but fell down and the accused belaboured him. ( 8 ) ARJUN Puri (PW-5) stated that while he and Naurangpuri were returning after attending the feast of Keshar Bhat they saw Krishna Kumar, Ram Swaroop, Phooldi and Bhawri beating Ram Niwas. Krishna and Ram Swaroop were armed with Dharias whereas Phooldi and Bhanwari had Gandasis. He did not see as to on which part of the body the injury was caused and by whom. Naurangpuri (PW-15) also deposed that on his return from mel of Keshar Bhat, he and Arjunpuri had seen Ram Swaroop, Krishna Kumar Phooldi and Bhawanri belabouring Ram Niwas with Dharias and Gandasis near the field of Polu Bhat. ( 9 ) DR. M. D. Qureshi (PW-18) performed autopsy on the dead body of Ram Niwas on 11/09/1997 and as per the post-mortem report, Ram Niwas sustained following ante-mortem injuries-1. Laceration 11/2" x 1/2 cm. on beginning of nose and 1/2 x 1/2 cm. (torn) Rt. on nostral with blackish brownish in colour. 2. Missing of Rt. canine and lateral incised tooth upper and Rt. lower, central incised with corresponding contusion dark bluish colour to Rt. Lip. 3. Stitched wound obliquely on left frontal parietal region 8 cm. long and 4 cm. long stacked wound over mid-occipital region of skull. On further dissection there is sub scalp haematoma left frontal region 7 x 11/2 cm. size with subdural haematoma over left fronto-parietal region and sub-scalp haematoma over mid-occipital region. On further examination there is fracture of left frontal bone underneath the stitched wound. Brain show contusion of size 7 x 2 cm. over left fronto-parietal lobe accumulated by dark red ante-mortem haematoma over left frontal region. 4. Diffused swelling over left ankle joint area with pits fracture ankle joint with ante-mortem haemotama. 5. Diffused swelling over Rt. ankle joint with fracture of both mellular bones and fracture of fibula bone Rt. side 1/3rd with ante-mortem haematoma. 6. Two stitched wounds on dorsum of left hand 11/2 cm. x 11/4 cm. with diffused swelling on dissection ante-mortem haematoma found. 7. Three stitched wounds 2 cm. x 1/2 cm. x 1 cm. on proximal part of index, middle, and ring finger palmer aspect. 8. Stitched wound 5 cm. obliquely post aspect Rt. side 1/3rd with ante-mortem haematoma. 6. Two stitched wounds on dorsum of left hand 11/2 cm. x 11/4 cm. with diffused swelling on dissection ante-mortem haematoma found. 7. Three stitched wounds 2 cm. x 1/2 cm. x 1 cm. on proximal part of index, middle, and ring finger palmer aspect. 8. Stitched wound 5 cm. obliquely post aspect Rt. forearm 1/3rd with dark black scab. 9. Stitched wound 2 cm. long Rt. forearm L. 1/3rd portion. 10. Multiple lacerations 5 x 2 cm. to 1/4 x 1/4 cm. on Rt. shoulder, clavicular region Rt. arm and forearm and hand at places with bruised area 15 x 16 cm. on Rt. shoulder, Rt. Clavicular region and Rt. supra scapular region. On further dissection effusion and extravasation of dark red blood. 11. Stitched wound 21/2 cm. long on upper lip mid part. 12. Stitched wound 2 cm. long anterior aspect of left leg L 1/3rd. 12a. Multiple lacerations 4 x 1 cm. to 1/4 cm. x 1/4 cm. over both knee and legs and both ankle (Torn) at places. 13. Laceration 5 cm. long on thoracic lumbar region. 14. Bruise 10 x 8 cm. on upper part of buttock and sacro-iliac region with effusion and extermination, of dark red blood on cut section. 15. Multiple lacerations 61/2 cm. x 1/2 cm. to 1/2 cm. x 1/2 cm. on postero-lateral aspect of left arm, forearm, elbow, left hand dorsally top of left shoulder. 16. Bruise 21 cm. to 4 cm. on left arm up to left shoulder anteriorly 12 x 10 cm. on middle of left shoulder. On further dissection effusion and extermination of dark red blood found. As per Dr. M. D. Qureshi cause of the death of Ram Niwas was coma brought about as a result of head injury. ( 10 ) HAVING scrutinised the testimony of the prosecution witnesses we find the fact situation of the case as under : (A) Informant Suwapuri (PW-1), the father of the deceased, in his deposition stated that he did not see the occurrence and he only put his thumb impression on the report as it was written by some one else. In his cross-examination he however deposed that his son Ram Niwas was involved in many criminal cases. (b) Sadhu Ram used to appear as a witness in other cases and this fact was admitted by him in his cross-examination. In his cross-examination he however deposed that his son Ram Niwas was involved in many criminal cases. (b) Sadhu Ram used to appear as a witness in other cases and this fact was admitted by him in his cross-examination. (c) Lal Chand PW-3, resided at a distance of three and half kilometers from the place of incident. He admitted that at the place of occurrence crop of Gunwar about the height of six feet was standing, and because of the crop nothing could be visible at a distance of 10 feet. (d) Statements of Sadhu Ram (PW-2) and Lal Chand (PW-3) are self contradictory in regard to causing the injury by Krishna Kumar and the place of incident. One stated that Krishna Kumar caused injury on head and incident occurred near the field of Ganesh Jat while other deposed that Krishna Kumar gave blow on the left hand near the field of Polu Bhat. (e) Chothu Puri (PW-4) deposed that even after receiving severe injuries, Ram Niwas could manage to reach at his house but he did not see as to on which part of his body Ram Niwas received injuries. Arjunpuri (PW-5) and Naurangpuri (PW-15) deposed that they did not see Sadhu Ram and Lal Chand near the place of incident. ( 11 ) IT is thus evident that on their own showing Sadhu Ram (PW-2), Lal Chand (PW-3), Arjunpuri (PW-5) and Naurangpuri (PW-15) were mere chance witnesses. Sadhu Ram and Lal Chand did not see Arjunpuri and Naurangpuri near the place of occurrence whereas Arjun Puri and Naurangpuri did not find Sadhu Ram and Lal Chand in the vicinity at the time of incident. It is also established from record that all the four alleged eye-witnesses did not reside anywhere near the place of incident where guvar crop of the height of six feet was standing. It is well settled that the testimony of a chance witness, although not necessarily false, is proverbially unsafe. If by coincidence or chance a person happens to be at the place of occurrence at the time it is taking place, he is called a chance witness. Such a piece of evidence is not necessarily incredible but does require cautious and close scrutiny. If by coincidence or chance a person happens to be at the place of occurrence at the time it is taking place, he is called a chance witness. Such a piece of evidence is not necessarily incredible but does require cautious and close scrutiny. As already noticed by us that Sadhu Ram while deposed that Krishna Kumar inflicted Dharia-blow on the head of Ram Niwas, Lalchand stated that Dharia-blow was given by Krishna Kumar on the left hand. Such a material inconsistency in the statement of chance witnesses creates doubt about their presence at the time of occurrence. It is the admitted case of the prosecution that Sadhu Ram, his jeep driver and Lal Chand the three grown up persons were present, yet without intervention by any body, Ram Niwas, a known criminal, was belaboured by two men and two women. It is inexplicable as to whether it was possible to see the incident while Guvar crop of the height of six feet was standing there. Undoubtedly Ram Niwas had received severe injuries but in view of his criminal back-ground it does not appear sound and reasonable that he would receive injuries without making any retaliation. This testimony of Chothpuri that Ram Niwas after receiving severe injuries could manage to cover the distance of five hundred feet and reach his house, does not appear to us trustworthy. ( 12 ) AFTER having analysed the fact situation of the case on hand we find that the prosecution has withheld the origin and genesis of the occurrence. In Assistant Collector v. V. P. Sayed Mohammed, AIR 1983 SC 168 : (1983 Cri LJ 225), their Lordships of the Supreme Court indicated that onus of proving the facts essential to the establishment of the charge against an accused lies upon the prosecution and the evidence must be such as to exclude every reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused. An accused cannot be convicted of an offence on the basis of conjectures or suspicions. If a reasonable doubt arises in the mind of the Court, after taking into consideration the entire material before it regarding the complicity of the accused the benefit of such doubt should be given to the accused. On examining the evidence of Sadhu Ram, Lal Chand, Arjunpuri and Naurangpuri from the point of view of trustworthiness we find ourselves unable to place any reliance on it. On examining the evidence of Sadhu Ram, Lal Chand, Arjunpuri and Naurangpuri from the point of view of trustworthiness we find ourselves unable to place any reliance on it. ( 13 ) THE learned trial Judge in our considered opinion, did not appreciate the evidence of these witnesses in a right perspective and committed illegality in convicting and sentencing the appellants. ( 14 ) AS a result of the above discussions we allow the appeal and set aside the impugned judgment of the learned trial Judge. The appellants stand acquitted of the charge under Section 302 read with Section 34, IPC. The appellants are in jail. They shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case. Appeal allowed. .