Honble MATHUR, J.–The accused appellants A/1 Shankar Lal, A/2 Babu Lal, A/3 Mangi Lal, A/4 Patia @ Pataram, A/5 Ganesh @ Gania, A/6 Bhura Ram, A/7 Maga Ram, A/8 Sona Ram, A/9 Dana Ram @ Dania, A/10 Kesa Ram, A/11 Jesa Ram and A/12 Ranchhora Ram stood tried on the charge under Section 147, 148, 302 read with 149 IPC for being members of unlawful assembly armed with deadly weapons with common object of committing murder of one Adaram. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track), Jalore convicted all the accused persons for offence under Section 302 read with 149 I.P.C. and sentenced each one of them to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000/-; in default of payment to further undergo simple imprisonment for one year, by judgment dated 2.2.2002. The appellants have also been convicted and sentenced for allied offences. Al the sentences have been ordered to run concurrently. (2). Briefly stated that facts of the case are that on 1.4.1999, PW.3 Niyaz Mohd., Head Constable posted at Police Out-post, Ummedpur, Police Station, Ahore recorded the statement of injured Adaram at Government Hospital, Ahore vide Exhibit P.7. He disclosed that on the proceeding day at about 9:00 PM his grand daughter PW.4 Miss Pankhu informed that accused persons namely Jasia, Babu, Gania, Dania, Magia, Sonia, Patia, Umiya, Ranchhor, Darga, Bhura, Chhela, Shankar, Kesa, Kheta and Mangia all by caste Meghwal, residents of village Madri armed with lathis and other deadly weapons arrived at their house and hurled stones and gave beating to his son Velaram. He alongwith his another son Kapuraram proceeded towards the house. On the way, near Ramdevji Temple, accused Jassiya and his two sons namely Babu and Ganesh assaulted him. Other accused persons pelted stones at them. His son Vela ran away. He could be saved on intervention by his wife PW-5 Smt. Sukhi. On the basis the statement Exhibit P-7, a case was registered at the Police Station, Ahore for offence under Section 143, 323 and 326 I.P.C. The injured Adaram died on 7.4.1999. Thus, the offence under Section 302 IPC was added. After usual investigation, police laid charge-sheet against all the accused persons for offence under Section 147, 148, 302, 308, 325 and 323/149 IPC. (3). The accused persons denied the charges leveled against them and claimed trial. Thus, the offence under Section 302 IPC was added. After usual investigation, police laid charge-sheet against all the accused persons for offence under Section 147, 148, 302, 308, 325 and 323/149 IPC. (3). The accused persons denied the charges leveled against them and claimed trial. The prosecution in support of the case, examined as many as 12 witnesses. The accused persons in their statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, denied the correctness of prosecution evidence appearing against them. The trial Court found prosecution case proved. The appellants have been convicted and sentenced as mentioned in the earlier part of the order. (4). Star witnesses of the prosecution are injured eye witnesses PW.2 Velaram and PW.10 Kapuraram. Other important witnesses are PW.4 Miss. Pankhu and PW.5 Smt. Sukhi. PW.2 Velaram is the son of deceased Adaram. He has stated that at about 9:00 PM while he was at the residence alongwith his brother Kapuraram, daughter Miss Pankhu and mother Smt. Sukhi accused appellant A/11 Jesa Ram arrived. He was followed by A/5 Ganesh @ Gania, A/2 Babura, A/4 Patia, A/9 Dania, A/3 Mangia, A/1 Shankaria, A/6 Bhuria, A/10 Kesa and A/8 Sonia. They asked his father to visit their house, for their shaving on the occasion of the death of Khetas mother. His father refused to accompany. He told them that he will visit only when his labour charges due for last two years are paid. Hearing the reply, appellant Jasia inflicted a lathi blow on the head of his father. Thereafter, Gania also gave a lathi blow so as Babu Lal. On account of simultaneous three blows his father fell down. He further stated that a lathi blow was also inflicted by Patia. This act was followed by Dania and other accused persons. His brother Kapura intervened. He also stated that Jasia gave a lathi blow on his head. His father became unconscious and as such he was taken to the hospital where he scummed to the injuries. He further stated that his father was lifted from Gavadi and thrown near Ramdevji Temple. In the cross examination, he admitted that accused Ranchhora Ram did not participate in the assault. He asserted that incident took place in Gavadi. He was confronted with his police statement D-1 wherein he has stated that he concealed himself in a neighbouring abandoned house. He become unconscious. In the cross examination, he admitted that accused Ranchhora Ram did not participate in the assault. He asserted that incident took place in Gavadi. He was confronted with his police statement D-1 wherein he has stated that he concealed himself in a neighbouring abandoned house. He become unconscious. He came to know about the incident from the mouth of his father Adaram and his brother Kapuraram. He denied to have given such statement to the police. (5). PW.4 Miss Pankhu, daughter of PW.2 Velaram is a child witness. She stated that her grand father Adaram, father Velaram and one Amraram were sitting at the platform outside the house on the day of incident. At that time, 16 accused persons armed with lathis and stones arrived. Accused Jasia, Gania and Babu Lal were armed with lathis and other accused persons were carrying stones in their hands. They started abusing her father and grand father. Jasia gave a lathi blow on the head of her father. Babu gave a lathi blow on the right hand of her father. It is further stated that Gania struck lathi blow on the chest of her father. Other accused persons hurled stones. Thereafter, her younger brother Galbaram went to inform her grand father who was residing at the outskirts of the village. When she returned alongwith her grand father, all the accused persons were standing before the house. Her grand father inquired about his son Velaram, on this accused Jasia, Gania and Babu gave lathi blows on the head of her grand father. Sonia, Sujia, Kesa and Patia broke the left hand of her grand father by stones. On intervention by her uncle Kapura, Jasia and Gania gave lathi blows on his head as well. Chalia and Kheta caused injuries on the hand of her uncle by stones. All other accused persons hurled stones on her grand father and uncle. His grand father was lifted on lathies and taken to Ramdevji Temple where he was thrown. She also stated that cause of quarrel was that their family members used to shave persons of Meghwal community but for last two years they had stopped, as they were not paid charges for the labour. They were pressurising them to continue to shave without payment of dues. She further stated that her grand father Adaji died in the hospital after 6-7 days. They were pressurising them to continue to shave without payment of dues. She further stated that her grand father Adaji died in the hospital after 6-7 days. In the cross examination, she admitted that her grand father sustained injuries outside the house. She also admitted that she was standing outside the house alongwith her grand father and uncle Kapuraram. On account of pelting of stones, there are about 100-200 stones inside the house. She also admitted that her grand father also sustained stone injuries on account of which there was swelling on his body. She admitted that the story as to taking her grand father to Ramdevji Temple on lathis was not disclosed to police. She denied the suggestion that complainant party initiated mischief by abusing Meghwals and Hurling stones on them. (6). PW-5 Mst. Sukhi, widow of deceased Adaram stated that on the date of incident, after taking dinner, she was sitting outside Gavadi alongwith her husband Adaram, brother in law Amra and son Velaram. At that time, 12 accused persons arrived armed with lathis and stones in hands. Sujia, Kesia and Dania gave lathi blows on the head of her son Velaram. Other accused persons hurled stones at him. Velaram ran away and took shelter in a nearby house. She further stated that when Velaram was being assaulted, she was inside the house and did not witness the incident. At that time, Adaram and Kapura were also at the house. They all went to the house situated outside the village. She was informed by Galba and Pankhu that Meghwals have given beating their father and therefore, they should accompany them. Thereafter, they went to the house. She has further stated that Jasia, Gania and Babura arrived there and gave lathi blows on the head of her husband Adaram. Other accused persons also assaulted her husband by lathis. They also hurled stones at him. Her husband fell down. On intervention by Pankhu and Kapura, accused persons Sujia, Patia and Dania assaulted her brother in law Kapura by lathis. Other accused persons hurled stones on them. Mst. Pankhu and Kapura also sustained injuries. Accused persons lifted her husband on lathis and took him to Ramdevji Temple. She also stated that their family members refused to shave Meghwals, as such, they were unhappy with them. Other accused persons hurled stones on them. Mst. Pankhu and Kapura also sustained injuries. Accused persons lifted her husband on lathis and took him to Ramdevji Temple. She also stated that their family members refused to shave Meghwals, as such, they were unhappy with them. In the cross examination, she admitted that atleast 200 stones were thrown in the house by assailants. She denied the suggestion that her husband Adaram, Kapura and Delaram went to Ramdevji Temple and abused Meghwals and hurled stones on them. She denied the suggestion that incident had not taken place at her house and she was giving a false statement. She mentioned that incident had taken place inside the house. She also admitted that a cross case has been filed against Velaram and Kapura by the police which is pending in the court. (7). PW.10 Kapuraram is son of deceased Adaram. He stated that at the time of incident, he was at the house situated inside the village. At that time, his mother, sister Pankhu and Galba were also at the house. He, however, pleaded ignorance if Vela was at house at that time. He further stated that his father Adaji was also at the house situated inside the village. While they were talking, all the accused persons arrived armed with lathis and stones. He further stated that Jasia, Gania, Sujia, Bhuria, Darga, Velia etc., made attack by lathis on his father. They also hurled stones on him. He further stated that 16 accused persons gave beating to his father. He further stated that his father was lifted on lathis and taken to Ramdevji Temple. He also stated that blood stained cloths of his father were changed by them. His father died after 6-7 days on account of injuries caused to him. In the cross examination, he admitted that no incident had taken place at Ramdevji Temple. He was being confronted with certain part of his police statement which he denied to have given. (8). PW.11 Dr. Kishan Singh Rathore has stated that he examined Kapuraram and prepared the Injury Report Exhibit P.30. He noticed following six injuries :- ``1. Lacerated wound 3.5 x 1 cm x bone deep on left side of scalp in temporal region. 2. Lacerated wound 2.5 x 2 cm x .5 cm on right side of scalp. 3. (8). PW.11 Dr. Kishan Singh Rathore has stated that he examined Kapuraram and prepared the Injury Report Exhibit P.30. He noticed following six injuries :- ``1. Lacerated wound 3.5 x 1 cm x bone deep on left side of scalp in temporal region. 2. Lacerated wound 2.5 x 2 cm x .5 cm on right side of scalp. 3. Lacerated wound 2.5 x 1 x bone deep on left side of forehead. 4. Diffused swelling with marked tenderms on left hand dorsum. 5. Bruise 8 cm x 4 cm on right side of back at its middle. 6. Echliymisis diffuse on both eyes. All the injuries were found to be simple in nature, except injury No.4. On the same day, he also examined Velaram and prepared the Injury Report Exhibit P.31. Following injuries were found on his person :- ``1. Lacerated wound 3.5 x 1 x skin deep on scalp in oceipital region post. 2. Bruise with swelling 4 x 3 cm on right forearm upper 1/2 part post. 3. Abrasion 4.5 x 2.5 cm on right side of chest near midline nipple. 4. Abrasion 3 cm x 2 cm on right leg below knee. 5. Bruise with swelling 1 cm x 1 cm on lower lip left side. In his opinion, all the injuries were simple in nature. (9). He also conducted post mortem of the dead body of Adaram and prepared the Post Mortem Report Exhibit P.33. Following injuries were found on his body :- ``1. Lacerated Wound - Stitched 1.5 x .5 x .5 cm on right side of scalp in temporal region. 2. Lacerated Wound Stitched 3.5 x .5 x .25 cm on right side of scalp in oceipital region. 3. Bruise- 4 cm x 3 cm on left shoulder. 4. Bruise- 3 cm x 3 cm on left knee. 5. Lacerated Wound .75 cm x .5 cm x skin deep on left leg at its middle. 6. Bruise 6 cm x 4 cm on left shiteal region lat. All injuries were ante mortem in nature. Injury No.3 was grievous in nature. Rest of the injuries were simple in nature. In the cross examination he admitted that when he prepared the Injury Report Exhibit P-32 of Adaram, he was conscious and his general condition was good. On X-Ray, he did not find any fracture on the head. However, he advised for CT-Scan. Injury No.3 was grievous in nature. Rest of the injuries were simple in nature. In the cross examination he admitted that when he prepared the Injury Report Exhibit P-32 of Adaram, he was conscious and his general condition was good. On X-Ray, he did not find any fracture on the head. However, he advised for CT-Scan. On close examination, it was found that there was a hairline fracture. He left the hospital on 2.4.1999. He admitted that injury Nos. 1, 3 and 6 could be sustained on falling on hard surface. He also admitted that injury Nos. 4 and 6 could be caused by stone. Below injury No.2, though, he did not find any fracture, but there was an extra-dural haematoma. He also stated that he could not say that if said extra dural haematoma had arisen only a day before the post mortem. He suo-moto stated that haematoma was the cause of injury No.2. Other witnesses are the formal police witnesses. (10). Since the alleged eye witnesses are members of the family of the deceased, we have scrutinised their evidence carefully. It appears from the evidence that there are two houses of complainant party, one inside the village Madri and another at the outskirts of village. As per the version given by PW.2 Velaram, son of deceased, while he alongwith his deceased father Adaram, brother PW.10 Kapuraram, daughter PW.4 Pankhu and mother PW.5 Sukhi were sitting inside the Gavadi, all the accused persons arrived, and asked his deceased father to undertake their traditional job of shaving on the occasion of death of the mother of Kheta. Deceased Adaram refused to take the job on the ground that the labour charges of earlier occasion were still due. He added that all the accused persons gave beating to his father as well as to other members of the family. He has given minute details as to the part played by each of the accused persons. He further stated that he took his father to hospital in unconscious condition. In the cross examination, he was confronted with his police statement wherein he had stated that he had concealed himself in a nearby house. He even denied the suggestion that his father used to reside in the house situated at the outskirts of the village. He also denied the suggestion that the incident had taken place on the way near Ramdevji Temple. He even denied the suggestion that his father used to reside in the house situated at the outskirts of the village. He also denied the suggestion that the incident had taken place on the way near Ramdevji Temple. The presence of this witness has been excluded by him own daughter PW.4 Miss Pankhu. She has stated that her father Velaram ran away and was hiding in a nearby house. She has given entirely a different version of the incident. She stated that her grand father Adaram alongwith Amraram were sitting outside the house on platform. Velaram was also sitting with them. At that time, 16 accused persons arrived there. They entered into a verbal altercation with her father Velaram. They gave beating to Velaram on account of which he ran away. She has further stated that his brother Galbaram went out to inform her grand father and grand mother who were residing in the house situated at the outskirts of the village. After some time, her grand father arrived and inquired about Velaram. She has further stated that Jasia, Gania and Babu gave lathi blows on the head of her grand father Adaram. Thus, she has given completely a different version from what has been spoken by Velaram. PW.5 Mst. Sukhi, widow of deceased Adaram has given third version of the incident. She stated that after taking food, while she alongwith her husband Adaram, brother in law Amra and son Velaram was sitting, all the accused persons arrived there. They gave beating to his son Velaram. She also stated that Velaram ran away. Thus, she also excludes the presence of Velaram on the spot. She has also stated that she did not witness the incident as to the beating to Velaram. She has further stated that while she alongwith her husband was at the residence outside the village, Galba and Pankhu informed about the incident. They returned to the house situated inside the village. She has further stated that while they were sitting inside the house, all the accused persons arrived. Jasia, Gania and Babura gave lathi blows on the head of her husband. Thus, according to her, the incident has taken place in the house which is situated inside the village. PW.10 Kapuraram has stated that the incident took place at the house inside the village. Jasia, Gania and Babura gave lathi blows on the head of her husband. Thus, according to her, the incident has taken place in the house which is situated inside the village. PW.10 Kapuraram has stated that the incident took place at the house inside the village. He has stated that all the accused persons arrived there armed with lathis and stone in their hands. He further stated that accused Jasia, Gania, Sujia, Bhuria, Darga, Valia etc., gave beating to his father. Thus, he has given fourth version of the incident. According to the other witnesses, it was Jasia, Ganesh and Babu who gave lathi blows on the head of deceased Adaram. He does not say a word about assault to Velaram. According to him there were 16 accused persons. (11). Statement of deceased Adaram was recorded by PW.3 Niyaz Mohd. vide Exhibit P.7. According to him, it was Galba and Pankhu who informed him about the incident of beating with Velaram. While he was proceeding toward the house situated inside the village, on the way near Ramdevji Temple, the accused persons attacked on him. Thus, according to him, the incident has taken place on the way near Ramdevji Temple. (12). There is also variance between the ocular and medical evidence. The three accused persons alleged to have given lath blows on the head of deceased Adaram and the other accused persons alleged to have pelted stones on him. However, the Post Mortem Report shows that in total there are only six injuries on the body of deceased Adaram. Except injury No.3 all the injuries are simple in nature. Third injury is on the left shoulder. PW.11 Dr. Kishan Singh Rathore also admitted that on X-Ray, he did not find any fracture on the head. He advised for CT-Scan. On close examination, it was found that there was a hairline fracture. He left the hospital on 2.4.1999. He was again brought to the hospital where he died on 6.4.1999. He admitted that injury Nos. 4 and 6 could be caused by stone. Below injury No.2, though, he did not find any fracture, but there was an extra-dural haematoma. In our view, if the version of the eye witnesses is accepted, then injuries on the body of deceased Adaram ought to be more serious. Three lathi blows on the head would not have caused only simple injuries. Below injury No.2, though, he did not find any fracture, but there was an extra-dural haematoma. In our view, if the version of the eye witnesses is accepted, then injuries on the body of deceased Adaram ought to be more serious. Three lathi blows on the head would not have caused only simple injuries. If the eye witnesses are believed, no less than 13 persons have pelted stones on him but this version does not find corroboration with medical evidence. Thus, the prosecution witnesses are lieing on material point and, therefore, renders themselves unreliable. The prosecution has chose to suppress the genesis and origin of the occurrence and presented a distorted version by introducing a false witness like PW.2 Velaram. The statement of eye witnesses are full of contradictions and meaningful embellishment. At the cost of repetition, it may be stated that each witnesses have pointed out different place and manner of incident. If we make an attempt to filter the evidence and jolt the part of the evidence, which may seem to be reliable, it will amount to reconstructing and introducing a new prosecution story which is not permissible in a criminal case. There is a serious doubt as to the correctness of the prosecution story. In view of this, we do not consider it safe to uphold the conviction of the appellants for offence under Section 302/149 IPC and all other allied offences. (13). In view of the aforesaid discussion, the instant appeal is allowed. The judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicting the appellants for offence under Section 302/149 IPC and all other allied offences is quashed and set aside. The appellants Shankar Lal S/o Parkha Ram, Babu Lal S/o Jasa Ram, Mangi Lal S/o Hema, Patia @ Pataram S/o Jasa, Ganesh @ Gania S/o Jasa Ram, Bhura Ram S/o Peeraji, Maga Ram S/o Chunilal, Sona Ram S/o Poonma, Dana Ram @ Dania S/o Mopa, Kesa Ram S/o Chunaji, Jesa Ram S/o Poonma and Ranchhora Ram S/o Sadasji are acquitted of all the charges levelled against them. They are on bail, their bail bonds are discharged. Appellants Jesa Ram, Babu Lal and Ganesh @ Gania are also acquitted of all the charges levelled against them. They are in jail, they shall be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case.