S. K. AGARWAL, V. S. BAJPAI, JJ. ( 1 ) THIS is a criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 7/3/1981 passed by Sri J. P. Sharma the then I Additional Sessions Judge, Banda in S. T. No. 169 of 1980, State v. Durja and others convicting the appellants under Sections 302, 149, 147, 201/149 and 148 I. P. C. and sentencing each of the appellants to undergo imprisonment for life one year and 3 years rigorous imprisonment respectively. All the sentences were to run concurrently. The trial judge did not award the appellants any sentence under Section 148 I. P. C. ( 2 ) FACTS giving rise to the appeal are that on 6/3/1980 informant Jageshwar lodged a written report at the Police Station with the allegations that his mother Parvati had started living with Mahadeo resident of Village Nimaur Har, District Banda as his wife since about 10-12 years. Five years from the mcident, appellants Durja, Deshraj, Dhanraj and Deoraj had set the house of Mahadeo on fire and a case was pending in the court. Later these appellants were acquitted. Mahadeo then filed an appeal before the High Court, Allahabad. On 5/3/1980 a Panchayat was called with a view to end the enmity between the parties. It was agreed in the Panchayat that both the parties will live amicably in future and Mahadeo agreed to withdraw his appeal. At about 12. 00 noon Mahadeo started for the field of Sahid Baba to cut Arhar crop. Appellants Durja, Deshraj, Dhanraj, Deoraj and Ramsiya also accompanied him. When Mahadeo did not return to house even after sun set the informant alongwith (Nemkaee) and Bhaiyadin came to village Nirmaur in search of him but it yielded no result. They then tried to search the appellants but they were not available at their house. The next morning, that is on 6/3/1980, the informant accompanied by others went to the Jangal again in search of Mahadeo. They found blood in the field of Tehri and when they went to the north of this field where they found the dead body of Mahadeo buried under the earth in the Naiiah. It carries only rain water. In the report he suspected that the appellants had caused the death of Mahadeo and had buried his dead body here in the nallah. On the basis of this report the chik F. I. R. Ext. It carries only rain water. In the report he suspected that the appellants had caused the death of Mahadeo and had buried his dead body here in the nallah. On the basis of this report the chik F. I. R. Ext. Ka-3 was drawn at the Police Station on 6/3/1980 at 5. 00 p. m. and a case was registered against unknown persons though the suspicion was expressed upon the appellants. ( 3 ) RAJPAL Singh Chauhan (P. W. 7) took up the investigation. He came to the place of occurrence the same day. He recorded the statement of the informant there. He then got the dead body taken out from the Nala and prepared inquest report Ext. Ka-4 and other connected papers Ext. Ka 5 and Ext. Ka 6. After getting the dead body sealed he des-patched the same through Constable Ramesh Singh for post mortem. He took one pair of shoes from the place of occur-rence in his custody alongwith blood stained shirt and one Bushirt and sealed them vide memo Ext. Ka-7. He also recovered blood stained that plain earth and sealed them in separate containers vide memo Ext. Ka-8. He recorded the statements of the witnesses on 7/3/1980. The site was inspected and site plan Ext. Ka-9 was also drawn by him. After completing the investigation charge-sheet Ext. Ka-10 against the accused was submitted. ( 4 ) DR. D. D. Sharma Medical Officer, District Hospital, Banda (P. W. 6) conducted the post mortem on the dead body on 7-3-1980 at 3. 30 p. m. and opined that the deceased had died about 2 days ago. He found the following injuries on the person of the deceased: 1. Lacerated wound on the Right side Forehead, Skull, 6 cm x 2 cm. x Bone deep 1 cm. above the medial end of Right Eye-brow. There was fracture of right Frontal Bone of Skull, Inner Temple with Compre-ssion of Mastoid and Haema-toma. 2. Lacerated wound on the left side of Skull 4 cm x 2 cm. x Bone deep 9 cm. , above the Mastoid and of left Eyebrow. 3. Lacerated wound on the left side of Skull 2. 5 cm. x 1. 5 cm. x Bone deep 5 cm. below and behind injury No. 2. 4. Lacerated wound on the left side of Skull 3 cm. x 2 cm. x Bone deep 5 cm. x Bone deep 9 cm. , above the Mastoid and of left Eyebrow. 3. Lacerated wound on the left side of Skull 2. 5 cm. x 1. 5 cm. x Bone deep 5 cm. below and behind injury No. 2. 4. Lacerated wound on the left side of Skull 3 cm. x 2 cm. x Bone deep 5 cm. above and behind injury No. 3. 5. Lacerated wound on the left side of Skull 5. 5 cm. x 1. 5 cm. x Bone deep 4. 5 cm. behind the left Ear and 1. 5. cm. below injury No. 4. 6. Lacerated wound on the left side of Skull 3 cm. x 1 cm. x Bone deep 5 cm. behind the left Ear and 1. 5 cm. below injury No. 5. 7. Lacerated wound on the Left side of back of Skull 4 cm. , above the External occipital Protuberance. On exposing of Injury No two to seven. Mem-brances were congested. Sub-dural haematoma seen with Multiple fracture of left Parie-tal, Temporal and occipital bone with clotted blood at fractured places. Laceration of left he hemisphere of the Brain was also seen. 8. Lacerated wound on the palmer aspect of left Middle finger at its Middle under phalangial joint 3 cm x 0. 5 cm. 9. Multiple abraded contusions on the left side back of chest and abdomen in an area of 32 cm x 17 cm. 10. Multiple abraded contusion on the right side back of chest in an area 19 cm x 12 cm. 11. Multiple abraded contusion on the lateral aspect of right knee in an area of 7 cm x 5 cm. 12. Multiple abraded contusions on the front of left knee 3 cm. x 2 cm. ( 5 ) ON internal examination the doctor found multiple fractures of left temporal parietal and occipital bones. There was congestion and Sub dural haematoma and membranes of the brain was congested and lacerated at the site of the injuries. Semi digested 25 grams Arhar ka dana was found in the stomach and small intestine and large intestine were loaded with faecal matter. The death of the deceased was caused as a result of Coma, Shock and Haemorrhage due to ante- mortem injuries. The post mortem report is Ext. 11. Semi digested 25 grams Arhar ka dana was found in the stomach and small intestine and large intestine were loaded with faecal matter. The death of the deceased was caused as a result of Coma, Shock and Haemorrhage due to ante- mortem injuries. The post mortem report is Ext. 11. ( 6 ) A charge under Sections 147, 148, 302/149 and 20 1/149 I. P. C. was framed against the appellants to which they pleaded not guilty. Appellant Durja stated in his statement under Section 313 Cr. P. C. that deceased Mahadeo had kidnapped Parvati who then had minor children and when her children grew up they avenged their mothers insult by killing Mahadeo. They falsely implicated them. The remaining 4 appellants who are the sons of appellant Durja also made similar statements before the court. The appellants, however, did not lead any evidence in their defence. ( 7 ) THE prosecution examined 7 witnesses in all, namely, informant. Jageshwar (P. W. 1), Parvati (P. W. 2), Nankai (P. W. 3), Sheetal Prasad (P. W. 4), Tahari (P. W. 5), Dr. D. Sharma (P. W. 6) Medical Officer who had conducted the post mortem upon the body of the deceased and S. I. Rajpal Singh Chauhan (P. W. 7 ). ( 8 ) RELYING upon this evidence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted the appellants and passed the aforesaid sentence. Aggrieved by this judgment the appellants have preferred this appeal. ( 9 ) WE have heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned A. G. A. and have gone through the record. ( 10 ) IT was contended by the learned counsel for the appellants that there is no eye witness of the incident. The only evidence against the appellants is that they were seen going after the Panchayat towards Sahid Babas field alongwith the deceased who had gone to cut Arhar crop. This evidence by itself be not sufficient to bring home the guilt to the accused. Jageshwar (P. W. 1) has stated that the Panchayat had assembled at 8. 00 a. m. and it was agreed in the Panchayat that the deceased would withdraw his appeal and the appellants would pay him Rs. 300/- towards the expenses of the appeal. Both the parties would live thereafter amicably. After the Panchayat was over the deceased went to the field of Sahid Baba to cut Arhar crop. 00 a. m. and it was agreed in the Panchayat that the deceased would withdraw his appeal and the appellants would pay him Rs. 300/- towards the expenses of the appeal. Both the parties would live thereafter amicably. After the Panchayat was over the deceased went to the field of Sahid Baba to cut Arhar crop. The appellants also accompanied him. When he did not return upto the evening a search was made but he was not traceable. The next morning, the dead body of Mahadeo was found in the nallah burned under its soil. Similar is the statement of Parvati (P. W. 2) and Mankai (P. W. 3 ). Even if their statements regarding deceased being last seen in the company of the appellants be believed no such inference can be drawn that immediately after the Panchyat where their grievances were settled amicably, they would go to commit the murder of the deceased. ( 11 ) A perusal of the statement of informant Jageshwar would show that he has made improvement from the F. I. R. In the F. I. R. there is no mention of the fact that appellant Durja was armed with a Farsa, Deoraj was armed with Barchi and remaining three appellants were armed with lathis. But in his cross examination he gave these details. His statement is belied by the fact that the doctor did not find any incised or punctured wound on the person of the deceased. This rules out participation in the incident of any sharp edged weapon. His statement is also belied by the statement of Parvati (P. W. 2) because she had stated that Durja and Deshraj were armed with lathis and Deoraj was armed with Farsa. Dhanraj was armed with Ballam and Ram Siya was armed with Barchi. This exhibits serious discre-pancy regarding those who held sharp edged weapons in the statement of these two witnesses. This fact goes to show that neither Jageshwar nor Parvati had seen the appellants going alongwith the decea-sed immediately after the Panchyat. They seem to have been deposing on their imagination only. They, therefore, are not wholly reliable witnesses. Both of them are got up witnesses. Witnesses Nankai, Sheetal Prasad and Tahari, P. Ws. This fact goes to show that neither Jageshwar nor Parvati had seen the appellants going alongwith the decea-sed immediately after the Panchyat. They seem to have been deposing on their imagination only. They, therefore, are not wholly reliable witnesses. Both of them are got up witnesses. Witnesses Nankai, Sheetal Prasad and Tahari, P. Ws. 3, 4 and 5 respectively have stated that they had gone to the Jangal at about Sun set and had overhead the cries of Mahadeo but they did not go towards the place from where the cries were coming because of fear. Witness Tahari (P. W. 5) even admitted that when the returned to his house he did not tell these facts to any one including the Investigating Officer. Rather he admitted that his statement was never recorded by the latter, S. I. Rajpal Singh Chauhan (P. W. 7) in his cross examination stated that witness Nankai (P. W. 2) had not given this statement that when he returned to the village in the evening he saw Mahadeo deceased at a distance of about 2 fields and he had heard the cries of Mahadeo. Witness Tahari also admitted that he had not told the Investigator that he had heard the cries of Mahadeo and it was for the first time that he made such a statement in trial. This clearly shows that the statement of these three witnesses is nothing but a subsequent development. It is to be termed improvement in the prosecution case from the F. I. R. and also 161 Cr. P. C. statement just to make out a case against these appellants. The result is that these witnesses cannot also be said to be reliable wit-nesses. None of them, therefore, furnish any corroboration to the prosecution story. They are deposing only on account of high degree of suspicion. Suspicion howsoever strong is no substitute to substantive evidence. ( 12 ) THERE is yet another fact which creates suspicion regarding the prosecution story. The body of the deceased is said to have been recovered at point A as shown in the site plan Ext. Ka-9 and the blood was found in the field at point B. The distance between both these points is about 85 paces. ( 12 ) THERE is yet another fact which creates suspicion regarding the prosecution story. The body of the deceased is said to have been recovered at point A as shown in the site plan Ext. Ka-9 and the blood was found in the field at point B. The distance between both these points is about 85 paces. There is no evidence whatsoever to show that the body of the deceased was carried or dragged from point B to point A i. e. for a distance of about 85 paces. The mere fact that the appellants were not found in their house on 5/3/1980, the date of the incident, would also not prove their guilt in any manner. In these circumstances, the learned Additional Sessions Judge committed an error in relying upon the statements of these prosecution wit-nesses whose testimony was not found reliable by us. It seems probable that these witnesses may have nursed a suspicion against these accused and story was later on provided this shape on the advice of the public prosecutor but we do not find there evidence acceptable for the reasons given above. The judgment and order of the Additional Sessions Judge, therefore, cannot be sustained. ( 13 ) THE circumstances furnished by two sets of witness are neither reliable nor can be declared wholly unimpregnable by the hypothesis of the innocence of the accused persons. It is too incongruous, incomplete and inherently weak in character that it is wholly impossible to base the convicts on its pact. The law is that the chain formed by the circumstances be compact and complete that there remains no possibility of it being fractured thesis of innocence. The evidence of all these witnesses, discussed threadbare lacks in this qualification wholly. ( 14 ) IN the result the appeal is allowed. The conviction and sentence recorded against the appellants are set aside and appellants Durja, Deshraj, Dhanraj. Deoraj and Ram Autar Ramsiya are acquitted of charges framed against them. They are on bail. They need not surrender. Their bail bonds are cancelled and the sureties are discharged. Appeal dismissed. . .