Judgment Sunil Kumar Garg, J.-All the abovementioned four appeals files by the accused appellants from jail are being decided by this common judgment as all of them have been preferred against the common judgment and order dated 112.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner in Sessions Case No. 5 7/97 by which he convicted the accused appellants for the offence under sections 396, 460 and 461 IPC and sentenced each of them in the following manner- Name of accused appellants Convicted under section Sentence awarded 1. Deepak 2. Ummalo 3. Sanwal Das 4. Prasanto396 IPC Imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 460 IPC Ten years SI and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for one month. 461 IPC One year SI and to pay a fine of Rs. 50/-, in default of payment of fine, to further undergo SI for 15 days. All the substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. It may be stated here that in the alleged incident, there were five accused persons and since one of the accused, namely, Dharma Phukan was child at the relevant time, therefore, his case was sent to the Children Court, Bikaner and he was not tried alongwith the present four accused appellants. 3. It may further be stated here that the accused appellants were not convicted for the offence under Section 302 IPC as they were already convicted and sentenced for the offence under Section 396 IPC and it was further ordered by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2 that Rs. 24,200/-be given to PW5 Jagdish Prasad. 4. It may further be stated here that since these appeals were preferred by the accused appellants from jail and the accused appellants were not being represented by any counsel, therefore, this Court appointed Amicus Curiae in the following man-ner:- S. No.Appeal No. Date of order Name of amicus curiae 1.33/2000 Depak vs. State24.09.2001 Mahendra Goyal 2. 24.09.2001 Mahendra Goyal 24.09.2001 A. Bhansali 3. 34/2000 Ummalo vs. State 24.09.2001 P.C. Solanki 4. 35/2000 Sanwal Das vs. State 24.09.2001 Vijay Purohit 5. 24.09.2001 Mahendra Goyal 24.09.2001 A. Bhansali 3. 34/2000 Ummalo vs. State 24.09.2001 P.C. Solanki 4. 35/2000 Sanwal Das vs. State 24.09.2001 Vijay Purohit 5. The facts giving rise to these jail appeals, in short, are as follows: On 3.1997 at about 9.00 AM, PW5 Jagdish Prasad lodged an oral report with the Police Station Nokha District Bikaner stating inter-alia that there was a cement factory known as Sarvotam Cement Private Limited, Charkada belonging to him situated on the road going from Nokha to Nagaur. It was further stated in the report by PW5 Jagdish Prasad that his elder brother Bhanwar Lal Daga used to live in the factory premises and a day before the alleged incident, he had already left for Jaipur. It was further stated in the report by PW5 Jagdish Prasad that on 3.1997 in the morning at about 8-8 1/4 AM, his factory servant Bahadur Singh (PW7) informed him at Nokha through telephone that in the varanda of the office of the factory, there was blood and upon this, he went to the factory where he found blood lying on the floor of the varanda of the office of the factory and thereafter, he entered in the office room where the account books were to be kept and found Bhanwarlal, Munim of the factory (hereinafter referred to as the deceased) lying on the floor dead and he found huge blood around the body of the deceased and he also found many injuries on his body. It was further stated in the report by PW5 Jagdish Prasad that the safe box lying in the room was found open and thus, he came to the conclusion that some unknown persons had entered in the office room and after murdering the deceased, they took away the amount kept in the safe box. PW12 Nand Lal, SHO, Police Station Nokha reduced that report into writing and chalked out regular FIR Ex.P/52 for the offence under sections 302, 460, 394, 34 IPC and started investigation. PW12 Nand Lal, SHO, Police Station Nokha reduced that report into writing and chalked out regular FIR Ex.P/52 for the offence under sections 302, 460, 394, 34 IPC and started investigation. After reducing that report into writing, PW12 Nand Lal reached on the spot alongwith photographer and vedeo-grapher and prepared site plan Ex.P/1 in presence of motbirs Jagdish Prasad (PW5), Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Manak Chand and site inspectionldescription memo Ex.P/1 A and thereafter, he made inspection of the dead body of the deceased Bhanwarlal and prepared inspection memo Ex.P/53 of dead body of deceased, in presence of motbirs Jagdish Prasad (PW5), Hazari Ram and Ramdhan and panchnama Ex.P/2 in presence of motbirs Jagdish Prasad (PW5), Hazari Ram, Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Manak Chand. Thereafter, he collected and sealed the blood lying near the dead body of the deceased and prepared the seizure memo of blood Ex.P/3 in presence of motbirs Jagdish Prasad (PW5), Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Manak Chand. Thereafter, he seized heirs lying on the choki outside the office through seizure memo Ex.P/4 in presence of motbirs Jagdish Prasad (PW5), Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Manak Chand. He also got done the vedeography of the place of occurrence and kept the vedeo cassette in the police custody and prepared fard Ex.P/5 in this respect in presence of motbirs Jagdish Prasad (PW5), Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Manak Chand. The clothes of the deceased were also seized and sealed through fard Ex.P/8 in presence of motbirs Jagdish Prasad (PW5), Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Manak Chand. Thereafter, post mortem of the dead body of the deceased Bhanwarlal ,was got conducted by Dr. B.K. Kashyap (PW1 1) and the post mortem report of deceased Bhanwarlal is Ex.P/42 where it was opined that the cause of death of deceased was multiple incised wounds on his body. Thereafter, in the evening at about 6.00 PM, the investigation of the case was handed over to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh, Dy. SP (South), Bikaner. He also inspected the place of occurrence on 3.1997 alongwith finger print expert and found marks of blood stain on the doors and floor and also found mark of chappal on the floor. The chance prints were taken from the floor, doors and place of occurrence by one Mukand Singh through fard Ex.P/20 in presence of motbirs Radheyshyam (PW2) and Kanhaiya Lal (PW6). The chance prints were taken from the floor, doors and place of occurrence by one Mukand Singh through fard Ex.P/20 in presence of motbirs Radheyshyam (PW2) and Kanhaiya Lal (PW6). In between the office building of factory and labourer quarters, he also found a chapal stained with blood and he seized that chappal through seizure memo Ex.P/10 in presence of motbirs Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Bhagirath (PW8). During the course of investigation, PW13 Tribunal Singh came to the conclusion that the alleged offence was committed by some labourers of the factory and not by some out-siders. During investigation, he interrogated some suspected persons and during interrogation, he saw injuries on the fingers of accused Dharma Phukan (since he was child, therefore, his case was sent to Children Court, Bikaner and he was not tried alongwith the present four accused appellants) and therefore, he arrested accused Dharma Phukan through arrest memo Ex.P/1 1 on 3.1997 in presence of motbirs Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Bhagirath (PW8). The accused Dharma Phukan was got medically examined and his injury report is Ex.P/93. During investigation, the accused Dharma Phukan gave information to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh that he could get recovered stolen amount of Rs. 4200/-and on his information, Rs. 4200/-were got recovered and the same were stained with blood. The further case of the prosecution is that during interrogation from accused Dharma Phukan, PW13 Tribhuvan Singh came to the conclusion that the present four accused appellants were also involved in the alleged incident alongwith the child accused Dharma Phukan. Thereafter, all the four accused appellants, namely, Deepak, Ummalo, Prasanto and Sanwal Das were arrested by PW13 Tribhuvan Singh on 6.3.1997 through arrest memos Ex.P/12, Ex.P/13 Ex.P/l4and Ex.P/15 respectively in presence of motbirs Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Bhagirath (PW8). The further case of the prosecution is that during investigation, the nails of all the four accused appellants were got cut and taken by PW13 Tribhuvan Singh, which were stained with blood, and the same were seized and sealed through seizure memos, the details of which are given below: - S.No.Name of accused appellants Seizure Memo No.Article No. Name of motbirs 1. Deepak Ex. P/16 22Gopi Kishan (PW1) Bhagirath (PW 8) 2. Prasanto Ex. P/17 23 Gopi Kishan (PW1) Bhagirath (PW 8) 3. Ummalo Ex. P/18 21 Gopi Kishan (PW1) Bhagirath (PW 8) 4. Sanwal Das Ex. Deepak Ex. P/16 22Gopi Kishan (PW1) Bhagirath (PW 8) 2. Prasanto Ex. P/17 23 Gopi Kishan (PW1) Bhagirath (PW 8) 3. Ummalo Ex. P/18 21 Gopi Kishan (PW1) Bhagirath (PW 8) 4. Sanwal Das Ex. P/19 24 Gopi Kishan (PW1) Bhagirath (PW 8) Accused appellant Prasanto of appeal No. 36/2000 During investigation, on 6.3.1997, the accused appellant Prasanto gave information (Ex.P/81) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered knife and in pursuance of that information, a knife stained with blood was recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same was seized through seizure memo Ex.P/22 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The knife was marked as article 15. During investigation, the accused appellant Prasanto gave another information (ExP/82) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered Rs. 5000/-and in pursuance of that information, the currency notes of Rs. 5000/-(Rs. 50-50) stained with blood were recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same were seizure through seizure memo Ex.P/21 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The currency notes were marked as article 17. During investigation, on 9.3.1997, the accused appellant Prasanto gave another information (Ex.P/91) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered his pent and jersy and in pursuance of that information, his pent and jersy stained with blood were recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same were seized through seizure memo Ex.P/40 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The pent was marked as article 4 and jersy was marked as article 3. The pent was marked as article 4 and jersy was marked as article 3. Accused appellant Deepak of appeal No. 33/2000 During investigation, the accused appellant Deepak gave information (Ex.P/74) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered knife and in pursuance of that information, a knife stained with blood was recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same was seized through seizure memo Ex.P/29 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The knife was marked as article 12. During investigation, the accused appellant Deepak gave another information (Ex.P/75) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered Rs. 5000/-and in pursuance of that information, the currency notes of Rs. 5000/-(Rs. 50-50) stained with blood were recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same were seized through seizure memo Ex.P/28 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The currency notes were marked as article 19. During investigation, on 9.3.1997, the accused appellant Deepak gave another information (Ex.P/88) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered his pent and bushirt and in pursuance of that information, his pent and bushirt stained with blood were recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same were seized through seizure memo Ex.P/34 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The pent was marked as article 10 and bushirt was marked as article 11. Accused appellant Ummalo of appeal No. 34/2000 During investigation, the accused appellant Ummalo gave information (Ex.P/80) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered knife and in pursuance of that information, a knife stained with blood was recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same was seized through seizure memo Ex.P/23 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The knife was marked as article 14. The knife was marked as article 14. During investigation, the accused appellant Ummalo gave another information (Ex.P/79) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered Rs. 5000/-and in pursuance of that information, the currency notes of Rs. 5000/-(Rs. 100-50-50) stained with blood were recovered a\ his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same were seized through seizure memo Ex.P/24 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The currency notes were marked as article 20. During investigation, on 9.3.1997, the accused appellant Ummalo gave another information (Ex.P/90) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered his pent, bushirt and woolen jersy and in pursuance of that information, his pent, bushirt and jersy stained with blood were recovered at his “instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same were seized through seizure memo Ex.P/38 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The pent was marked as article 5, bushirt was marked as article 6 and woolen jersy was marked as article 7. Accused appellant Sanwal Das of appeal No. 35/2000 During investigation, on 6.3.1997 the accused appellant Sanwal Das gave information (Ex.P/76) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered knife and in pursuance of that information, a knife stained with blood was recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same was seized through seizure memo Ex.P/25 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The knife was marked as article 13. During investigation, the accused appellant Sanwal Das gave another information (Ex.P/77) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered Rs. 5000/-and in pursuance of that information, the currency notes of Rs. 5000/-(Rs. 100-50-50) stained with blood were recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same were seized through seizure memo Ex.P/27 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The currency notes were marked as article 18. 5000/-(Rs. 100-50-50) stained with blood were recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same were seized through seizure memo Ex.P/27 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The currency notes were marked as article 18. During investigation, on 9.3.1997, the accused appellant Sanwal Das gave another information (Ex.P/89) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered his pent and bushirt and in pursuance of that information, his pent and bushirt stained with blood were recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same were seized through seizure memo Ex.P/36 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1O). The pent was marked as article 8 and bushirt was marked as article 9. During investigation, the accused appellant Sanwal Das gave another information (Ex.P/78) under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW13 Tribhuvan Singh to the effect that he could get recovered chappal and in pursuance of that information, chappal stained with blood was recovered at his instance from the place pointed out by him, which is mentioned in the fard and the same was seized through seizure memo Ex.P/26 in presence of motbirs Ram Gopal (PW9) and Om Prakash (PW1 0). The chappal was marked as article 2. The further case of the prosecution is that thereafter, all the sealed articles were sent for chemical analysis and the report of the FSL pertaining to articles knife, clothes, nails and currency notes is Ex.P/105, which shows that on these articles, human blood was found. After completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the accused appellants in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Nokhaon 28.4.1997 for the offence under sections 449, 302, 396, 460, 461 and 120B IPC and thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Session, Bikaner on 19.7.1997 and thereafter, the learned Sessions Judge, Bikaner through order dated 8.1997 transferred this case for trial to the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner. The learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner on 28.1997 framed charges against the accused appellants under sections 396, 460, 461 and 302 IPC. The charges were read over and explained to the accused appellants, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner. The learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner on 28.1997 framed charges against the accused appellants under sections 396, 460, 461 and 302 IPC. The charges were read over and explained to the accused appellants, who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses and got exhibited 129 documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused appellants under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded. In defence, no evidence was led by the accused appellants. After recording evidence and conclusion of trial, the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner through judgment and order dated 112.1999 convicted the accused appellants for the offence under sections 396, 460 and 461 IPC and sentenced each of them in the manner as stated above, by placing reliance on the following circumstances: .(i) That blood stained knifes were recovered on the information of the accused appellants. .(ii) That blood stained currency notes were recovered on the information of the accused appellants. (iii) That blood stained clothes belonging to the accused appellants were recovered on the information of the accused appellants. .(iv) That blood stained chappal was recovered on the information of the accused appellant Sanwal Das. .(v) That human blood was found on the nails of the accused appellants. Thus, the above so-called recovery of articles on the information of the accused appellants and circumstance of finding of human blood on the nails of the accused appellants were sufficient to connect the accused appellants with the commission of crime. Aggrieved from the said judgment and order dated 112.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner, these four appeals have been preferred by the accused appellants from jail. 6. In these appeals, it has been submitted by the learned counsel for the accused appellants that the judgment and order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner dated 112.1999 convicting and sentencing the accused appellants for the offence under sections 396, 460 and 461 IPC cannot be sustained because of the following reasons: .(i) That in the present case, the so-called recovery has been made from open place and, therefore, no conviction can take place on the basis of such recovery. Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner dated 112.1999 convicting and sentencing the accused appellants for the offence under sections 396, 460 and 461 IPC cannot be sustained because of the following reasons: .(i) That in the present case, the so-called recovery has been made from open place and, therefore, no conviction can take place on the basis of such recovery. .(ii) That the witnesses to the so-called recovery do not support the case of the prosecution and thus, the so-called recovery is not sufficient to connect the accused appellants with the commission of crime. (iii) That since in the FIR Ex.P/52, the amount of currency notes contained in the safe box was not mentioned, therefore, the statement of PW5 Jagdish Prasad that Rs. 24,200/-were in the safe box is an after-thought and thus, the recovery of currency notes creates doubt on the prosecution case. .(iv) That there is deficiency from the side of the prosecution to prove linking evidence and from this point of view also, benefit of doubt should be given to the accused appellants. .(v) That the blood group of the accused appellants has not been determined and, therefore, the prosecution has not been able toy establish that the blood found on the articles was that of the accused appellants. 7. On the other hand, the learned Public Prosecutor supported the impugned judgment and order dated 112.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner. 8. We have heard the learned counsel for the accused appellants and the learned Public Prosecutor and perused the record of the case. 9. Sofar as the point whether the death of the deceased Bhanwarlal was homicidal or not, for that the statement of PW1 1 Dr. B.K. Kashyap, who conducted the post mortem of the dead body of the deceased, may be referred to. He states in his statement recorded in Court that on 3.1997 he was Senior Medical Officer at Nokha and on that day, he and Dr. B.L. Hatila conducted the post mortem of the dead body of the deceased and found as many as 18 incised wounds on various parts of the body of the deceased and the cause of death of the deceased was multiple incised wounds. He has proved the post mortem report of the deceased Ex.P/42. 10. Thus, from the statement of PW11 Dr. He has proved the post mortem report of the deceased Ex.P/42. 10. Thus, from the statement of PW11 Dr. B.K. Kashyap, the fact that death of the deceased was homicidal is well established by the prosecution. 11. Thenext point which is to be considered is whether deceased was murdered by the accused appellants or not and whether thereafter, amount lying in the safe box was looted by the accused appellants or not. .12. In the present case, there is no direct evidence to prove the case and the prosecution has placed reliance on the following circumstantial evidence: .(i) Recovery of blood stained knifes on the information of the accused appellants. .(ii) Recovery of blood stained currency notes at the instance of the accused appellants. (iii) Recovery of blood stained clothes belonging to the accused appellants on the information of the accused appellants. .(iv) Recovery of blood stained chappal on the information of the accused appellant Sanwal Das. .(v) Circumstance of tinding of human blood on the nails of the accused appellants. 13. Beforeproceeding further, it may be stated here that from the statement of PW5 Jagdish Prasad, the fact that the accused appellants were labourers of the factory is well established. 14. It may further be stated here that as per the prosecution case, there were in all five accused and since one of the accused, namely, Dharma Phukan was tried separately in the Children Court, therefore, in this sessions case, the present four accused appellants were tried by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 2, Bikaner and thus, from the side of the prosecution, it has been established that there were in all five accused persons involved in the alleged incident. 15. Beforeproceeding further, we must see what is circumstantial evidence and what is its evidentiary value in criminal jurisprudence. 16. Circumstantial evidence is that which relates to a service of other facts than the fact in issue; but which by experience have been found so associated with the fact in issue in relation of cause and effect that it leads to a satisfactory conclusion. It is one of the established principles of law that a witness may lie but not the circumstances. However, the court must adopt a cautious approach while basing its conviction purely on circumstantial evidence. As evidence there is no difference between direct and circumstantial evidence. It is one of the established principles of law that a witness may lie but not the circumstances. However, the court must adopt a cautious approach while basing its conviction purely on circumstantial evidence. As evidence there is no difference between direct and circumstantial evidence. The only difference is in that as proof , the former directly establishes the commission of the offence whereas the latter does so by placing circumstances which lead to irresistible inference of guilt. 17. In reference to cases where there is no direct evidence and the decision has to rest on circumstantial evidence, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a line of decisions has consistently held that such evidence must satisir the following tests: 1. the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn must be cogently and firmly established. 2. those circumstances should be of a defluiite tendency unerringly pointing towards the guilt of the accused, 3. thecircumstances, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and none else; and 4. the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation on any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence.” 18. In this connection, the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar vs. State of M.P. (1), Padala Veera vs. State of A.P. (2), Josheph vs. State of Kerala (3), and Kuldeep vs. State of Rajasthan (4), may be seen. 19. It is also well settled that the prosecution has to establish each circumstance by independent evidence and the circumstances so established should form a complete chain without giving room to any other hypothesis and should be consistent with his guilt and are inconsistent with his innocence. 20. Before proceeding further, legal aspect of the recovery and information given by the accused appellant under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act may also be discussed here. 21. 20. Before proceeding further, legal aspect of the recovery and information given by the accused appellant under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act may also be discussed here. 21. For applicability of Section 27, two conditions are pre- requisite; (i) information must be such as caused discovery of the fact; (ii) the information must relate distinctly to the fact discovered so much of such information, whether it amounts to a confession or relate distinctly thereby discovery may be proved. 22. Section 2 7 of the Indian Evidence Act is an exception to the general rule that a statement made before police is not admissible in evidence. .23. Thefollowing are the requirements or conditions for application of Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act: 1. The fact must have been discovered in consequence of the information received from the accused. 2. The person giving the information must be accused of an offence. 3. He must be in custody of a police officer. .4. Only that portion of the information which relates strictly to discovery can be proved. The rest is irrelevant. .5. The discovery of fact must relate to the commission of some crime. 6. Before the statement is proved somebody must depose that some article was discovered in consequence of the information received from the accused. 24. Keeping the above principles in mind, the recovery and circumstances of the present case are being examined. Recovery of knifes, currency notes, clothes and chappal at the instance of accused appellants. 25. All the four accused appellants, namely, Deepak, Ummalo, Prasanto and Sanwal Das were arrested by PW13 Tribhuvan Singh on 6.3.1997 through arresf memos Ex.P/12, Ex.P/13 Ex.P/14 and Ex.P/15 respectively in presence of motbirs Gopi Kishan (PW1) and Bhagirath (PW8). 26. During investigation, on the informations given by the accused appellants under Section 27 of the Evidence Act to PW1 3 Tribhuvan Singh, the articles knifes, currency notes, clothes and chappal were recovered through seizure memos, the details of which are given below: S. No.Name of article with numberInformation Memo No.Seizure Memo No. Names of the Motbirs Accused appellant Prasanto 1. Knife -15 Ex.P/81 Ex. P/22 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 2. Currency Notes -17 Ex.P/82 Ex.P/21 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 3. Pent - 4 Jersy - 3 Ex.P/91 Ex.P/40 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) Accused appellant Deepak 1. Knife -12 Ex.P/74 Ex. Knife -15 Ex.P/81 Ex. P/22 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 2. Currency Notes -17 Ex.P/82 Ex.P/21 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 3. Pent - 4 Jersy - 3 Ex.P/91 Ex.P/40 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) Accused appellant Deepak 1. Knife -12 Ex.P/74 Ex. P/29 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 2. Currency Notes -19 Ex.P/75 Ex.P/28 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 3. Pent - 10 Jersy - 11 Ex.P/88 Ex.P/34 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) Accused appellant Ummalo 1. Knife -14 Ex.P/80 Ex. P/23 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 2. Currency Notes -20 Ex.P/79 Ex.P/24 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 3.Pent - 5 Bushirt - 6 Woolen Jersy - 3Ex.P/90 Ex.P/38 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) Accused Appellant Sanwal Das 1. Knife -13 Ex.P/76 Ex. P/25 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 2. Currency Notes -18 Ex.P/77 Ex.P/27 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 3. Pent - 8 Jersy - 9 Ex.P/89 Ex.P/36 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 4. Chappal - 2 Ex. P/78 Ex. P/26 Ram Gopal (PW9) Om Prakash (PW10) 27. In this case, the most important witness of the prosecution is PW13 Tribhu-van Singh, who took o