Judgment BRAJ NANDAN PRASAD SINGH, J. 1. On the fateful day of incident everything was as usual. House inmates were busy with their home works. At about 8.00 p.m. while Subuklal Yadav was milking the cow at the door of his house, his wife Nirmala Devi was catching hold the calf. Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav alias Brijendra Yadav too were at the house who would not have apprehended the catastrophe that was looming large over their heads and the tragedy that had befallen on their family that night, as the motley population of that house was whacked to pieces by armed assailants, leaving other house inmates to mourn the death of those who were dragged and kidnapped by them. 2. At this juncture, it would be convenient to advert to the prosecution case briefly, so as to appreciate contentions raised. Allegedly, at about 8.00 p.m. on 28th July, 1994, while Subuklal Yadav (PW 4) was milking cow at the door of his house and his wife Nirmala Devi (PW 5) was holding the calf, Pramodi Yadav, Police Yadav, Bokan Yadav, Borhan Yadav, Dhorho Yadav, Pulkit Yadav, Ramdhani Yadav, Ramjee Yadav, Suresh Yadav, Upendra Yadav, Arun Yadav, Shambhu Yadav and Sahdeo Yadav visited his house holding fire arms with them and began to abuse. Subuklal Yadav stood up when Pramod Yadav flashed torch light on him and also pointed a pistol. It seems that apprehending eminent danger, he held barrel of pistol, when Arun Yadav fired shots on him but the aim was lost and the shots hit the cow. When Nirmala Devi came for his rescue, she too was assaulted with butt of pistol on her forehead by Arun Yadav. The armed miscreants, it was alleged, took Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav in their custody, dragged them and took them towards river side with them. As it was night, Subuklal Yadav being scared of the attrocious crime committed by the miscreants did hot venture to go out of the house for search of his father and brother who had been kidnapped by the miscreants, the appellants. In the following morning at about 5.00 a.m. he rushed to Khagaria Police Station in the company of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 when Khagaria police visited village but no action could be taken, the place of occurrence falling within the jurisdiction of Sahebpur Kamal Police Station within Begusarai district. In the following morning at about 5.00 a.m. he rushed to Khagaria Police Station in the company of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 when Khagaria police visited village but no action could be taken, the place of occurrence falling within the jurisdiction of Sahebpur Kamal Police Station within Begusarai district. While he was returning from Khagaria Police Station, he came to know about recovery of dead bodies near Umesh Nagar Railway Station. He too rushed there where dead bodies were found cut into pieces. The police personnels of Sahebpur Kamal Police Station also happened to visit the place where two dead bodies cut into pieces were noticed near Umesh Nagar Railway Station and there his fardbeyan was recorded by the police. He claimed to have identified both the dead bodies which happened to be of his father Dobhi Yadav and his brother Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav. The police officer prepared inquest reports over the dead bodies, seized blood stained wearing apparels from the place where the dead bodies were found cut into pieces and also prepared seizure memo. The dead bodies were sent to Begusarai Hospital where no post-mortem coud be conducted, as dead bodies were found in several pieces. Faced with this situation, Gopal Sharma (PW 6), the police officer sent the pieces of dead bodies to Department of Forensic Medicine, Darbhanga Medical College, Laheriasarai for its examination. The police officer entrusted with the onerous task of investigation had also visited house of Subuklal Yadav from where two deceased had been dragged and kidnapped by the appellants, and the police found there a cow with injuries on the body. The services of veterinary doctor was requisitioned to examine the injured cow and after the cow had succumbed to the injuries, post-mortem was conducted by the doctor who happened to PW 1 Nirmala Devi, PW 5, who too had sustained injuries during the incident, was examined by the doctor. A report in respect of two dead bodies was received from Department of Forensic Medicine, Darbhanga Medical College, Laheriasarai, and after conclusion of investigation, the police laid charge-sheet before the Court. As Vijay Yadav, Ramdhani Yadav and Pramodi Yadav had been absconding, the trial was segragated from the parent Sessions records. 3. A report in respect of two dead bodies was received from Department of Forensic Medicine, Darbhanga Medical College, Laheriasarai, and after conclusion of investigation, the police laid charge-sheet before the Court. As Vijay Yadav, Ramdhani Yadav and Pramodi Yadav had been absconding, the trial was segragated from the parent Sessions records. 3. The defence of the appellants both before the Court below and this Court had been that of innocence and they denied all the circumstances shown to be incriminating, against them. Their involvement due to some litigations, was also one of the defence advanced by them. As for killing of Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav, the defence of the appellants was that since they bore criminal incidents, they might have been killed by those who were hostile to them. However, the defence have not chosen to examine witness on their behalf. The trial Court, however, having marshalled and appreciated the entire evidence available on the record, while negativing innocence of the appellants, found prosecution version to be true and negated defence. All the eleven indicted appellants suffered conviction under Sections 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code for which they were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life they also suffered conviction under Section 364 of the Indian Penal Code for which they sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of ten years, and likewise, for their conviction under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act, they were sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of five years on each count. Arun Yadav suffered conviction also under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for which he was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of seven years. In case of those who suffered conviction for more than one count, sentences were directed to run concurrently. 4. We do not deem it necessary to re-State in many details our own findings as to the exact role played by the appellants, we find them the same as has been recorded by the trial Court. However, briefly we may indicate what we have found, to appreciate the evidence. Reiterating his earliest version, Subuklal Yadav, the maker of the fardbeyan, states about appellants and others visiting his house in the night, when he was milking the cow and his wife Nirmala Devi had held the calf. However, briefly we may indicate what we have found, to appreciate the evidence. Reiterating his earliest version, Subuklal Yadav, the maker of the fardbeyan, states about appellants and others visiting his house in the night, when he was milking the cow and his wife Nirmala Devi had held the calf. His brother and father were sitting it the door of his house. Pramod Yadav had flashed torch light and aimed pistol, when he made resistance, pursuant to which though Arun Yadav fired shots, but the aim was lost, hitting cow, which sustained injuries. Nirmala Devi too sustained injuries with butt of pistol of Arun Yadav, when she came for his rescue. The appellants and their associates took Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav, towards Ganges river. He being scared, escaped in the house of Kapildeo Yadav. He however, visited Khagaria Police Station in the following morning in the company of Ashok Yadav and from there he rushed to a place, south of Umesh Nagar Railway Station where two dead bodies cut into pieces were noticed and he identified them to be that of Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav. his fardbeyan was recorded there by the police there. 5. Ashok Yadav, PW 2, happens to be grand son of Dobhi Yadav and cousin of Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav, having heard sounds of firings he rushed towards door of the house from inside, when he noticed appellants and others. Arun Yadav had assaulted Nirmala Devi on head with butt of pistol. Sagar Yadav and Vijay Yadav too assaulted her with but of pistol. The appellants had taken Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav with them towards north. Subuklal Yadav had escaped shots, fired by Arun Yadav but it hit the cow. As the night had set in, he could not go out of the house for search of the victims. 6. Narrations almost in similar terms and veins as that of Subuklal Yadav, who happened to her husband was made also by Nirmala Devi, PW 5 about Arun Yadav assaulting her on her forehead with butt of pistol when she had come for rescue of her husband, from firings resorted to by Arun Yadav, which though did not hit her husband, caused injury to the cow. The appellants and others took Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav towards Rahua Bahiar, pursuant to which the dead bodies cut into pieces were found north of Umesh Nager Station. 7. Gopal Sharma, Sub-Inspector of Police, (PW 6) stated to have rushed to Umesh Nagar Station on tip off, about dead bodies of two persons lying there, cut into pieces and there he recorded statement of Subuklal Yadav. Both the dead bodies were identified by Subuklal Yadav to be that of Dobhi Yadav and Hullo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav. The dead bodies were found cut into pieces. He prepared inquest report over the dead bodies. He seized blood stained earth and wearing apparels of the deceased. The dead bodies were found near the railway track which was a lonely place. The Police Officer stated to have visited village Chamantole also which was the first place of occurrence, where he noticed a cow with injuries.The statement of witnesses available there was recorded by him. As the post-mortem oyer the dead bodies, which had been cut into pieces could not be performed, he sent the dead bodies to the Department of Forensic Medicine, Darbhanga Medical College, Laheriasarai. After report was received from the Department of Forensic Medicine, charge-sheet as laid by him before the Court. Dr. Shekhar Kumar, PW 1 stated to have carried out autopsy over the dead body of cow and in his opinion, death of cow was due to hit of cartridge by fire arms. 8. We may also refer to the evidence of Kapildeo Yadav, PW 3 who had turned volte face to the State. His house lies adjacent to the house of Subuklal Yadav. Having heard sound of firing he rushed to his house and noticed a cow with injuries. Dobhi Yadav and Hullo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav were found traceless. Attention of this witness had been drawn by the State, for his evidence being not with the tune of his early version which he rendered before the police during investigation, as before the police he claimed to have witnessed the incident with his nacked eyes, about Nirmala Devi sustaining injuries and appellants having dragged Dobhi Yadav and Hullo Yadav with them. Before the police, as the Investigating Officer States, he also claimed identification of dead bodies of Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav near Umeshnagar station. Before the police, as the Investigating Officer States, he also claimed identification of dead bodies of Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav near Umeshnagar station. This is all the evidences that have been adduced on behalf of the State. 9. Manifold contentions were raised on behalf of the appellants to assail the findings recorded by the trial Court. Assail- ing the finding recorded by the Court below, finding Arun Yadav guilty under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, submission on behalf of the appellants is that apart from the fact that the doctor who clinically examined Nirmala Devi was not examined at trial, the injury report placed on the record would rather suggest, only simple injuries caused by hard and blunt object, which did not bring offence within the ambit of Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code, and we too endorse the submission made at bar. Though there had been evidence of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 Subuklal Yadav, PW 4 and Nirmala Devi, PW 5 the injured, about she sustaining injuries on the forehead with butt of pistol by Arun Yadav, neither the nature of injuries nor intention of the assailant in using only butt of pistol in assaulting the injured, would bring his action within the ambit of Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code. There did not appear to be intervening circumstances too which forbade the assailant to translate the design into action. Had there been intention for causing death, the assailant who was holding fire arm, would not have used butt of the pistol for assaulting the victim. Since doctor was not examined at trial, there has been no finding of the medical expert, but regard being had to the nature of accusation" about injuries caused, accusation attributed to Arun Yadav on this score brings the mischief well within the ambit of Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code and hence while finding of guilt recorded by the Court below under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code against Arun Yadav and sentencing him on that count is set aside, he is convicted under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code for which we do not propose to award sentence. 10. 10. Though evidences on record would suggest that when Arun Yadav fired shots on Subuklal Yadav, the aim was lost and a cow got injured, but for that, Arun Yadav had not suffered conviction under Section 429 of the Indian Penal Code, probably for there being no such charge. Even intention of Arun Yadav did not appear to cause injury to cow, as it sustained injury when aim was lost, after Arun Yadav fired shots on Subuklal Yadav, and in that view of the matter also, omission of framing charge and recording conviction under Section 429 of the Indian Penal Code on that count did not appear to be material. 11. Other significant issue which merits consideration was that the appellant Sagar Yadav was not named in the first information report and his name had not surfaced, as have been acknowledged by the Investigation Officer in his evidence, even in further statement of Subuklal Yadav, among the miscreants. We can appreciate this flaw in backdrop of status of appellant Sagar Yadav. Undisputedly, the appellants reside in village Chamantole and it is suggested rather that they were next door neighbours of Subuklal Yadav. They were even on visiting terms if this state of affair is accepted, there does not appear to be any cogent reason for non-inclusion of name of appellant Sagar Yadav among the miscreants, had he visited house of Subuklal Yadav on the fateful night. He was not stranger and had he been there, he could have been well identified along with others. Though there has been good evidence about his involvement too, in the incident, regard being had to his status about he being not a stranger to the family of informant, while suspecting his complicity, we propose to give him the benefit of doubt and acquit him of the charges levelled against him. 12. The other submission was the even though two family members were shown to have been kidnapped by the appellants, no family member had shown anxiety to locate them and it was quite unlikely that either PW 2 Ashok Yadav or PW 4 Subuklal Yadav would not have made endeavours for their search who were none else but their with and kin. Though argument betrays ingenuinity of the learned counsel and looks attractive, was devoid of merit. Though argument betrays ingenuinity of the learned counsel and looks attractive, was devoid of merit. The night had set in and a number of armed miscreants had ransacked their house in the night who had caused injury to Nirmala Devi and had made attempts to shoot out Subuklal Yadav also. They had kidnapped two family members in the night itself. The police station was at a distance of about 8. K.M. from village Chamantole. Though episode of kidnapping of two persons had floated in the village also, but it seems to us that apprehending the attrocious crime, committed by the appellants, no one dared to go out of the village for search of two victims. To us, nothing appears to be unnatural and against human sensibilities and instincts. Referring to the evidence of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 the submission is made that if narration made by him was to be given any credence, in the following morning of the incident, he visited Khagaria Police Station where he had narrated incident to the Police Officer which was also reduced in writing by him, but neither Khagaria police was examined by the State nor first information rendered to Khagaria police by PW 2 which was also reduced in writing was brought on the record during trial and hence the prosecution was guilty of withholding the earliest version. However, for want of details, one has to gauge as to what sort of information, even it be so, had been given by Ashok Yadav, PW 2 before Khagaria police, and that a part, Khagaria police had not even jurisdiction in the matter, as the place of occurrence was well within the jurisdiction of Sahebpur Kamal Police Station and hence viewed with this angle, the prosecution case would not suffer infirmity moreso, when evidence of witnesses were direct and trustworthy. Mere failure of the State to bring on the record statement of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 recorded by Khagaria police would not constitute serious infirmity/Haw much less any infirmity in the prosecution case in case where the evidences were direct and witnesses were found trustworthy and we may not loose sight of the fact that the object of the law was designed to further the ends of justice and not to frustrate them by introduction of technicality and in plethora of decisions of the Court, the matter is no longer res Integra. 13. 13. Feeble arguments were made about improbability of identification of the appellants in the darkened night by house inmates. We have noticed from evidences that though night had set in, it was only 8.00 p.m. and hence presumption of light burning in the house in such hour of night can well be drawn, and that apart, witnesses were emphatic about identification of the appellants in the light of torch flashed by the appellants. The evidence of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 would rather suggest that the appellants were next door neighbours, not strangers, and hence probability of their identification even in the deem light was not a remote possibility. 14. A good deal of argument was addressed to the Court about identification of the dead bodies, and with much stress it was sought to be argued that as the dead bodies were found cut into pieces, neither post mortem could be held over them nor report of doctor of forensic medicine would persuade one to believe that the dead bodies cut into pieces was in a state to facilitate identification of the deceased. From the inquest report of Dobhi Yadav it would however appear that though skull was found smashed, part of human body below waist, right leg, shoulder of left hand, left hand with backbone and chest was found connected. The dead body was found cut into pieces with sharp edged weapon, and skull damaged by pieces of stone. The family members of the deceased had identified the dead body to be that of Dobhi Yadav. As for dead body of Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav the head had been found severed from the trunk, legs were found tied with piece of cloth, the human body below the waist was found cut. A piece of cloth was found wrapped around the neck, both eyes carved out from the cavity and tongue was found pulled out. The ears too was found cut and mouth was found open. His dead body too was identified by the family members to be that of Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav, and one my not loose sight of evidence of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 and Subuklal Yadav, PW 4 who claimed identification of dead bodies of Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav, even though dead bodies were found cut into pieces. His dead body too was identified by the family members to be that of Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav, and one my not loose sight of evidence of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 and Subuklal Yadav, PW 4 who claimed identification of dead bodies of Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav, even though dead bodies were found cut into pieces. We may have a look, also of the findings of the doctor of forensic medicine, Darbhanga Medical Collage, Lahereiasaral. The finding in respect of one dead body Ext. 2/6 is in the following terms: (i) Skull into multiple pieces attached with decomposed muscles and ligaments. (ii) Pelvis with right lower limb. (iii) Thorax with left shoulder. The muscles were found infiltrated with blood and blood clots. Penis, testis and scrotal issues were identified in the pelvic port of skeletal remains. Injuries : One l"x 1/2" penetrating wound was found in right side of skull just above the external ear with fracture of the right parietal bone. One wound 6"x 3 1/2 was present over left side of skull extending from occipitalbone to left maxilla, fracturing the left temporal bone. A metallic conical bullet was found lodged in the soft tissues with extensive infiltration of blood around. In the opinion of the doctor the highly decomposed, skeletal remains, was of a male aged 60 + 5 years (Sixty years plus minus five years). The injuries presenting the head appeared to be ante-mortem, grievous and dangerous to life and were caused by a bullet fired by a fire arm. The state of ligament, bones and soft tissues indicated that this person might have died within 3 to 7 days from the date of receipt of the exhibit in the department i.e. 1.8.94. These findings of the doctor, in our view, conform to the physical features of the dead body of Dobhi Yadav mentioned in the inquest report. 15 The finding of the doctor in respect of other dead body was in the following terms: A highly decomposed skeletal remains were identified. (1) Skull, (2) Both lower limbs, (3) Left upper limb, (4) Trunks. The soft tissues around the wounds were found infiltrated with blood and blood clots. Injuries : (i) One incised, penetrating wound 2" x 1- 1/2" x upto vertebral body was detected over right side of neck just below the mandible. (1) Skull, (2) Both lower limbs, (3) Left upper limb, (4) Trunks. The soft tissues around the wounds were found infiltrated with blood and blood clots. Injuries : (i) One incised, penetrating wound 2" x 1- 1/2" x upto vertebral body was detected over right side of neck just below the mandible. (ii) The right common carotid blood vessels were found cut and the surrounding muscles were found infiltrated with blood and blood clots. (iii) The cut injuries present over the bones were indicated that sharp cutting weapons have been used for dismembering the parts. These were perimortem injuries. In opinion of the doctor, the highly decomposed, skeletal remain was of male aged between 30 years and 35 years. The injuries present over the neck were antemortem and indicative of use of some sharp cutting and pointed weapon, these injuries were grievous and dangerous to life and death, in such cases occurs due to haemorrhage and shock. The state of bones, ligaments, and muscles were suggestive that this person might have died within 3-7 days from the date of receipt of exhibit in the department i.e. 1.8.1994. The findings of the doctor, in our view, conform to the inquest report of Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav about features appearing on part of the body of the deceased as shown in inquest report. 16. The inquest report of Dobhi Yadav shows that the body was cut into pieces with some sharp edged weapon and skull was found smashed, and viewed in this backdrop, one for a moment may pause to gauge as to whether identification of the dead body, of which skull was found smashed, was possible, but that is not the case with the dead body of Hullo Yadav whose some part of the dead body was found cut leaving some parts of the body intact. On the skull of Hulo Yadav, there was cut injury on his forehead on its right side. The tongue was found cut and eyes were removed from the eye cavity, and viewed in this backdrop identification of dead body Hulo Yadav cannot be considered to be of remote possibility, and that apart, it is not uncommon that persons familiar with the deceased can identify the dead body even with the part of the limbs by virtue of his association with him. Those who claimed identification of parts of body of Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav were none else but family members of the two deceased. To impeach their claim of identification of the dead bodies it was open to the defence to elicit from them as to from which part of the body, they had claimed the dead bodies to be that of Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav but no such endeavours appear to have been made by the defence during trial, and hence though the learned counsel for the appellants wanted to dig a hole in the prosecution case on this score, we find argument meritless. 17. Though Ashok Yadav, PW 2 stated that Nirmala Devi, PW 5 accompanied him while going to Sahebpur Kamal Police Station, the later did not make such assertion in her evidence about she visiting Sahebpur Kamal Police Station in company of Ashok Yadav, but for that alone, good evidence of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 cannot be thrown over board for want of corroboration from Nirmala Devi. As these are matters of petty details, they would not cast doubt on credibility of the witness who is found otherwise reliable. We may reiterate that when witnesses are speaking on details after considerable lapse of time, some minor variations are apt to occur in narrations made by them and such narrations would not merit consideration unless they are on vital issues. 18. The appellants were rather neighbours of the deceased residing in the same vicinity. Their fields, as has been the evidence, were contiguous to their lands. There is no good evidence about litigation between the parties preceding the incident. The parties were not shown to be at loggers head, preceding the incident for some animosity and fued between them, and in backdrop of his state of affairs the submission is that the absence of motive introduces inherent improbability in prosecution version and learned counsel being rather quite vocal submits that the consistency in narrations made by witnesses was not the sole criteria to judge bona fide of the accusations, as sometimes truth goes behind, and falsehood comes to surface, and hence it is argued with all stress that broad probabilities of the case would not be ignored by the Court, while judging culpability of the accused. We may, however, say that with plethora of judicial decisions rendered on the subject, the contorous of ambit seem to the enough delienated. One should not be oblivious that commission of offence depends on frame of mind and motive in many cases is not surfaced, as it is shrouded in mystry which cannot be easily judged and only culprit knows as to what moved him to adopt a certain cause of action. We have come across to notice that sometimes attrocious crimes are committed to avenge even some fancied wrongs. It is, therefore , not necessary that motive should be proportionately strong to commit grave crimes as sometimes, even for atrocious offence, motive may appear to be weak or fragile. 19. Though reference of some cases in which both parties were somehow involved, is found in the evidence of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 and we may refer to Khagaria P.S. Case No. 415 of 1994. This case was admittedly instituted after the alleged incident. There is reference of another case which bears Sahebpur Kamal P.S. Case No. 141 of 1994 with regard to killing of Hari Lal Yadav who happened to be the cousin of appellant Sahdeo Yadav. This case was instituted on behest of Nityanand Yadav, and Subuklal Yadav, PW 4 figures in that gase as an accused. Father of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 also was an accused in that case. We do not have further details as to when this case was instituted. If there was no motive for the appellants for commission of the offence, conversely, the inference would be that the witnesses cannot be disbelieved particularly when they had no axe to grind against the appellants, and as we have noticed, in view of plethora of decisions on this issue, the scope of controversy has been extremely narrowed down. While commenting on conduct of Ashok Yadav, PW 2 the submission is that though he claimed to he an ocular witness to the atrocious came committed by the appellants, it is not expected that he would not have reacted and would have preferred to sit idle to witness the incident. We may visualise the situation to appreciate contentions raised. A number of armed miscreants had ransacked the house of the informant at night. Attempts were made to shoot out Subuklal Yadav. We may visualise the situation to appreciate contentions raised. A number of armed miscreants had ransacked the house of the informant at night. Attempts were made to shoot out Subuklal Yadav. The miscreants took two house inmates in their captivity and dragged them to river side, and realising that his discretion to be silent was better part of his valour he cannot be blamed for his conduel of a passive onlooker to the incident. If there are cluster of houses, as has been the evidence, around the place of occurrence, no body would have dared to resist action of the appellants, particularly when it was night. 20. Against weight of mass of evidence, defence of appellants at trial was that presence of dead bodies of the deceased, cut into pieces near railway track of Umesh Nagar Station was galore to eloquently suggest that both the deceased had been crushed under wheels of the train. However, defence of the appellants has to be rejected for more than one reasons. Had human body been crushed under wheels of train, parts of body, as has been the evidence of Investigating Officer, would not have been found at distance from railway track, and secondly. If finding of Dr. A.R.K. Prasad of Department of Forensic Medicine vide Ext. 2/6 is to carry any significance, the injuries present on the head appeared to be ante- mortem, grievous and dangerous to life and were caused by bullet fired by fire arms. Even in cases of other dead body cut into pieces finding of the doctor vide Ext. 2/7 was that the injuries present over the neck were ante-mortem and indicative of use of some sharp cutting and pointed weapons. No one has seen killing of the deceased and hence inference alone can be drawn. The appellants who had kidnapped both the victims were armed with deadly weapons, and hence presence of such injuries on the person of the deceased would not run counter to the prosecution version about appellants to be the killer of the deceased and unerringly leading to one conclusion and that is their guilt. The defence of the appellants as such appears to be inherently improbable and imaginative, which has to be discarded, as they are falsified by circumstances available on the record. The defence of the appellants as such appears to be inherently improbable and imaginative, which has to be discarded, as they are falsified by circumstances available on the record. In case of Swapana Patra V/s. State of West Bengal, reported in (1999) 9 SCC 242 , the Apex Court said that in case of circumstantial evidence when the accused offers an explanation and that explanation is found not to be true, then the same offers as an additional link in the chain of circumstances to complete chain. The same principle has been followed and reiterated in State of Maharashtra V/s. Suresh, (2000) 1 SCC 471 . 21. There has been good and clinching evidence to hold that Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav were abducted by appellants and their associates in the night in question. Since no one claims to have witnessed killing of the deceased, learned counsel would urge that assuming the prosecution case to be true on its face value, this should be a case of only an abduction simpliciter. We may, however, repell the contention, as it is shown from evidence that both Dobni Yadav and Hulo Yadav were abducted by appellants who took them in their custody and hence they alone knew what happened to them until they were with them. If they were found killed after abduction, the permitted reasonings process enables the Court to draw presumption that the appellants had killed them. Such inference, however, can be disrupted only when appellants had shown as to what else had happened to them at least until they were in their custody. Once it is shown that the appellants had kidnapped Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav whose dead bodies were found subsequently from a place near Umesh Nagar Station the irresistible inference, applying the legal sound process embodied in Section 106 of the Evidence Act, that can be drawn was that the kidnappers had executed their killings and as to what happened to the victims after abduction, was pre-eminently only within the knowledge of the abductors, and hence burden of proving that fact was upon them. To fortify our views we may profitably quote some observations made by the Apex Court in the case of State of West Bengal V/s. Mohammad Omar and others, reported in (2000) 8 SCC 382 , in which somewhat, similar circumstances had appeared in the case: "When it is proved to the satisfaction of the Court that Mahesh as abducted by the accused and they took him out of that area, the accused alone knew what happened to him until he was with them. If he was found murdered within a short time after the abduction the permitted reasoning process would enable the Court to draw the presumption that the accused have murdered him. Such inference can be disrupted if the accused would tell the Court what else happened to Mahesh at least until he was in their custody. During argument we put a question to learned senior counsel for the respondents based on by pothetical illustration. If a boy is kidnaped from lawful custody of his guardian in the sight of his people and the kidnappers disappeared with the prey, what would be the normal inference if the mangled dead body of the boy is recovered within a couple of hours from elsewhere. The query was made whether upon proof of the above facts an inference could be drawn that the kidnappers would have killed the boy. Learned Senior counsel finally conceded that in such a case the inference is reasonably certain that the boy was killed by the kidnappers unless they explained otherwise. In this context, we may profitably utilise the legal principle embodied in Section 106 of the Evidence Act which reads as follows : "when any fact is especially within the knowledge of any person, the burden of proving that fact is upon him". The section is not intended to relieve the prosecution of its burden to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubts. But the section would apply to cases where the prosecution has succeeded in proving facts from which a reasonable inference can be drawn regarding the existence of certain other facts, unless the accused by virtue of his special knowledge regarding such facts, failed to offer any explanation which might drive the Court to draw a different inference. But the section would apply to cases where the prosecution has succeeded in proving facts from which a reasonable inference can be drawn regarding the existence of certain other facts, unless the accused by virtue of his special knowledge regarding such facts, failed to offer any explanation which might drive the Court to draw a different inference. Vivian Bose, J. had observed that Section 106 of the Evidence Act is designed to meet certain exceptional cases in which it would be impossible for the prosecution to establish certain facts which are particularly within the knowledge of the accused. In Shambhu Nath Mehra V/s. State of Ajmer, the learned Judge has stated the legal principle thus : This lays down the general rule that in a criminal case the burden of proof is on the prosecution and Section 106 is certainly not intended to relieve it of that duty. On the contrary, it is designed to meet certain exceptional cases in which it would be impossible, or at any rate disproportionately difficult for the prosecution to establish facts which are especially within the knowledge of the accused and which he could prove without difficulty or inconvenience. The word especially stresses that. It means facts that are preeminently or exceptionally within his knowledge." 22. The witnesses with sustained consistency have stated at trial about abduction of both the victims by the appellants and their associates at 8.00 p.m. on 28th July, 1994 from their house, pursuant to which it is not in dispute that their mangled dead bodies were found near Umeshnagar Station. The inquest reports were prepared at 14.45 hours on 29th July, 1994. The distance of Umeshnagar Station from village Chamantole too was not very insignificant as it is hardly at the distance of 3/4 k.m. We have noticed that the findings of the doctor of Forensic Science was indicative of presence of fire arm injuries and also sharp cutting injuries on the person of the deceased, and hence considering the proximity of the place within which the dead bodies were found mangled, with injuries of kind mentioned above are eloquent to suggest that the victims death was caused by appellants. This is probably most formidable circumstantial evidence against appellants. This is probably most formidable circumstantial evidence against appellants. Following ratio of decision cited above we may safely conclude that if any deviation from the aforesaid course would have been factually correct, only the abductors would know about it, because such deviation would have been especially within their knowledge. Since defence of the appellants about death of the victims due to crushing under the wheels of train was quite incomputable with the finding of the doctor of forensic medicine and is found to be imaginative and inherently improbable, inference drawn about appellants to be the killers of the deceased would stand undisturbed. 23. Though some comments were also made by the learned counsel for the appellants questioning credibility of the witnesses who were family members of the deceased, in our view, test of credit worthiness and acceptability ought to be the guiding factors, and if requirements as above, stand answered in the affirmative, question of raising an eyebrow on reliability of witness would be quite futile. The test is the credibility and acceptability of the witnesses available, if they are so, the prosecution should be able to prove their case with their assistance. Coming to the contextual facts once again, while it is true that there is no independent witness, but evidence available on record does inspire confidence and the appellants have not been able to shake the credibility of the eye-witnesses and there is not even material contradiction in the case of the prosecution. 24. The evidences available on the record, in particular that of the injured witness and the fardbeyan too which too was recorded without any loss of time were a eloquent to suggest that all the appellants had encircled the victims, and inflicting injury on Nirmala Devi took both of them in their company. The entire gamut of the matter in issue leaves no manner of doubt the concerned action by reason of simultaneous conscious mind of a person participating in the action for abduction of Dobhi Yadav and Hulo Yadav alias Brejendra Yadav to bring about their death which was eventually committed, and that makes all the appellants (excluding Sagar Yadav) answerable for their conviction both under Sections 364 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code with the aid of Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. The finding recorded by the trial Court both as regards conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants appeared to be based on meticulous appreciation of evidences which cannot be upset. 25. In the result, while Sagar Yadav is acquitted of the charges levelled against him and he is discharged from the liability of bail bonds, the appeal preferred by rest appellants in Cr. Appeal No. 448 of 1998 is dismissed. Cr. Appeal Nos. 518 and 525 of 1998 too being merit less are dismissed. Since Sahdeo Yadav, Borhan Yadav and Arun Yadav (in Cr. Appeal No. 448 of 1998) and Upendra Yadav, Suresh Yadav and Pulkit Yadav (in Cr. Appeal No. 518 of 1998) and Police Yadav alias Pulish Yadav (in Cr. Appeal No. 525 of 1998) are on bail, their bail bonds are cancelled and it is directed that all coercive steps be taken by the trial Court for their apprehension and to consign them to custody to serve out remainder of sentence awarded to them. SACHCHIDANAND JHA, J. 26 I agree.