K. K. MISRA, J. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 223. 1980 passed by Shri P. C. Saxena, the then Session Judge, Pilibhit in Session Trial No. A-189 of 1979 State v. Brahma Swaroop and others, convicting the appellants under Section 302/34 I. P. C. and sentencing each of them to undergo life imprisonment. 2. The brief facts of this case are that on 17-10-79, the deceased Ram Singh had gone to Bisalpur in connection with the Pairvi of a case which was pending between Pooran and the accused and from there he was to return by bus in the afternoon. He and Pooran used to get down from the bus at Bilsanda and. due to enmity of the accused persons with the deceased, some of his sons used to receive him at Bilsanda Bus Stand wherefrom they used to come together on foot. On the day of incident also, two sons of the deceased, namely, Jhabboo Singh, informant P. W. I and Pahalwan Singh along with their uncle Khurram Singh P. W. 2 met the deceased at Bilsanda Bus Stand at about 4. 30 P. M. Pooran was also in the company of the deceased at that time and these five persons started journey on foot towards their village. At about 5 P. M. when they reached near the grove of Durga Bhurji in the Banjar land of village Hempura, accused Brahms waroop came out from behind the Neem tree and assaulted the deceased with Kanta which hit him on the head. When the deceased turned back and started running, the remaining three accused persons, namely, Mool Chand, Tribhuwan Singh and Nathu Singh who had hidden themselves behind the eastern Khai of the aforesaid grove came out with weapons in their hands. At that time Nathu Singh accused was armed with Suja and Mool Chand and Tribhuwan Singh were armed with Kantas. All these four accused surrounded Ram Singh deceased and assaulted him with their respective weapons. This occurrence was seen by Jhabboo Singh, the first informant Pahalwan Singh, Khurram Singh, P. W. 2 and Pooran Singh, P. W. 4. They shouted for help but as there was none in the vicinity, they had no alternative but to flee away from the place of the occurrence. This occurrence was seen by Jhabboo Singh, the first informant Pahalwan Singh, Khurram Singh, P. W. 2 and Pooran Singh, P. W. 4. They shouted for help but as there was none in the vicinity, they had no alternative but to flee away from the place of the occurrence. When they came back after collecting certain persons from the village, they found that the accused had already left the place of occurrence and Ram Singh deceased was lying dead. Jhabboo Singh, informant left some of those Persons near the dead body. He then scribed the report at the "arhat" shop of one Jwala and thereafter lodged the F. I. R. at the Police Station Bilsanda district Pilibhit at 7. 15 P. M. The investigation of the case was entrusted to S. I. Daya Ram Dube, P. W. 6 who rushed to the place of occurrence and conducted the inquest of the dead body, which was sent by him for post mortem examination. 3. At the trial, the prosecution in order to prove its case against the accused produced six witnesses in all. Out of them Jhabbo Singh P. W. I, Khurram Singh, P. W. 2, and Pooran, P. W. 4 were eye witnesses arid rest relate to post-mortem of the dead body of the deceased and the investigation of the case after its registration. 4. Dr. A. K. Mehrotra, P. W. 3 conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of the decease Ram Singh on 18-10- 79 at 3. 30 P. M. The following ante mortem injuries were found on the dead body of Ram Singh, deceased who was aged about 60 years: 1. Incised wound 26 cm x 10 cm x through the buccal cavity oblique extending from the right side neck upto the left eye & right. Vertebrae column deep. The body of the fist cervical cut cleanly obliquely. The upper & lower-jaw tissue under the injury cut & the skull hanging with the help of skin only. (2) Incised Wound 16 cm x 4 cm on right side face x skull deep from in front of the right ear, hanging separated with a piece of skin. (3) Incised Wound 10 cm x 1. 5 cm x brain cavity deep horizontal & in the post part of skull 18 cm from the fore- head more on right side of skull. (3) Incised Wound 10 cm x 1. 5 cm x brain cavity deep horizontal & in the post part of skull 18 cm from the fore- head more on right side of skull. (4) Incised Wound 10 cm x 1. 5 cm x brain cavity deep on the left side scalp 8 cm from the left ear pinna. (5) Incised Wound 5 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on the Left side forehead vertical just above the left eye brow. (6) Incised Wound 4 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on the left side cheek horizontal just below the left eyes. Probably the continuation of injury. No. 5. (7) Incised Wounds three in number each about 1 cm apart on the chin & each measuring 3 cm X 0. 5 cm. X skin deep extending from the middle of the chin & towards inside chin. (8) Incised Wound 4 cm X1 cm X buccal cavity deep on the right side face with the lower jaw cut under injury. The injury is 2 cm for injury No. 1 and anterior. (9) Incised wound 4 cm X 1. 5 cm X bone deep on the ant aspect of the tip of right shoulder with the head of humerus cut under injury. (10) Incised wound 3 cm X 0. 5 cm. X chest cavity deep on the right side back of the chest near midline 24 cm below the base of the neck. (11) Incised Wound 3 cm X 0. 5 cm. X skin deep on the back of the chest in mid line 4 cm below injury, No. 10. (12) Punctured wound 3 cm X 1 cm X muscle deep on the right side back of the abdomen 14 cm above the right Iliac spine. (13) Abrasion 7 cm X 1. 5 cm on the outer & middle aspect of right upper arm. (14) Two linear abrasions making a X shaped mark & measuring about 7 cm X 0. 5 cm each on the upper part of right side abdomen 15 cm below the right nipple. (15) Linear abrasion 5 cm X 0. 5 cm on the right side chest anteriorly 4 cm from the right nipple & near midline. (16) Punctured Wound at the left border of umbilicus. 2 cm X 1 cm X abdominal cavity deep. 5 cm each on the upper part of right side abdomen 15 cm below the right nipple. (15) Linear abrasion 5 cm X 0. 5 cm on the right side chest anteriorly 4 cm from the right nipple & near midline. (16) Punctured Wound at the left border of umbilicus. 2 cm X 1 cm X abdominal cavity deep. (17) Incised Wound 5 cm X 2 cm X bone deep at the base of 3 & 4 metacarpal & through the web of the two fingers extending on the palmer aspect of right hand. The web being cut. 5. In the opinion of the doctor the death was caused due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of ante mortem injuries. 6. After completing investigation, charge sheet was submitted against present accused-appellants. 7. At the trial, the accused appellants denied the prosecution allegations and claimed to be tried. They in their statements under Section 313 Cr. P. C. stated that they had been falsely implicated in the case due to enmity and party factions. But they did not adduce any evidence in their defence. 8. The trial Court found the case fully proved against the accused appellants u/s 302/34 I. P. C. and convicted and sentenced them as above. 9. We have heard Sri P. N. Misra, learned counsel for the appellants and learned A. G. A. 10. Jhabboo Singh, P. W. 1 in his statement before the trial Court deposed that on the day of the occurrence, the deceased had gone to Bisalpur in connection with Pairvi of the case between Pooran- P. W. 4 and the accused persons. He was to return from there by bus in the afternoon. He and Pooran were to get down from the bus at Bilsanda and because of the enmity of the deceased with these accused persons, he used to receive him at Bilsanda Bus Stand wherefrom they used to come together on foot. On the day of the occurrence also he, Pahalwan Singh along with Khurram Singh. P. W. 2 met the deceased at Bilsanda Bus Stand at about 4. 30 P. M. Pooran P. W. 4 was also accompanying the deceased at that time. From the is stand they all started on foot for their village. On the day of the occurrence also he, Pahalwan Singh along with Khurram Singh. P. W. 2 met the deceased at Bilsanda Bus Stand at about 4. 30 P. M. Pooran P. W. 4 was also accompanying the deceased at that time. From the is stand they all started on foot for their village. He further deposed that when they reached near the grove of Durga Bhurji in the banjar of village Hempura, accused Brahma Swarup came out from behind the neem" tree and attacked the deceased with a Kanta. On this, the deceased and started running but the remaining three accused who had hidden themselves behind the eastern Khai of the aforesaid grove came out with weapons in their hands. Nathu Singh was armed with a Suja and Tribhuwan Singh were armed with Kantas. All these four accused appellants surrounded the deceased and started assaulting him with their respective weapons. When he and other persons made an alarm, the accused appellants chased them and threatened to assault them also. They all cried for help but as there was none in the vicinity, they had no alternative but to flee away from the place of the occurrence. He further deposed that they went straight to their village and after collecting certain persons from there returned to the place of occurrence. When they came back from the village, they found that the accused had already left the place of the occurrence and Ram Singh was lying dead. He further deposed about the long-standing enmity between his family and the accused appellants. One case of grove was earlier fought between their families and two cases of 107/117 Cr. P. C. were also fought between them. One case of 107/117 Cr. P. C. had started between them 20 days before the date of incident but had ended oh the second date fixed in that case. He further explained the reason (for not suffering any injury at the time of the incident and deposed that at the time of the incident, he and other witnesses had no weapon and, there for, they could not retaliate and fled towards their village and returned after collecting some persons from the village. He further deposed that when they first saw Brahmswaroop accused, he was at a distance of 20 paces. After seeing the accused, they had no opportunity to flee from the place of occurrence. He further deposed that when they first saw Brahmswaroop accused, he was at a distance of 20 paces. After seeing the accused, they had no opportunity to flee from the place of occurrence. Brahmswaroop made an assault on the head of the deceased and when the deceased ran back for a distance of 20 paces, all the accused-appellants surrounded him and assaulted him with their respective weapons. He also gave sufficient explanation for not having any arm with them as the weapons of the deceased and Khurram had been deposited in connection with a case under Sections 107/117 Cr. P. C. 11. Khurram Singh, P. W. 2 also deposed similarly. He deposed that at about 5 p. m. he and other witnesses were corning from bus stand. He stated that he along with Pahalwan Singh and Jhabboo Singh was returning from bus stand along with the deceased and Pooran. When they reached near the Banjar, Brahmswaroop accused came from behind the neem tree and assaulted the deceased with the Kanta and at the same time when the deceased had run 20 paces back, other accused persons, namely, Tribuhuvan Singh armed with Kanta, Mool Chand also armed with Kanta and Naththu Singh armed with Suja came from the Khai existing in the eastern side and all assaulted the deceased with their respective weapons. When he and other witnesses raised an alarm, the accused chased them to kill them also. He and other witnesses then fled towards the village and when they came back, they found the deceased dead. He also gave explanation that he had gone to bus stand to fetch the deceased. 12. P. W. 4 Pooran also deposed in the same tenor about the incident. He further deposed that on the date of incident, he along with the deceased had gone to Bisalpur in connection with a case which was pending between this witness and the accused persons and on the date of incident he won the case and decree was passed in his favour and when they were returning from the Bilsanda bus stand, the incident took place. 13. 13. Learned counsel for the appellants has assailed the order of conviction on the grounds that (1) there is enmity between the parties and the appellants have been falsely implicated in the case due to the enmity; (2) no independent witness has been produced at the trial; and (3) there is conflict between the eye witness account and the medical evidence. 14. So far as the first submission made by the leaned counsel for the appellants is concerned, we find that the enmity has been accepted by the witnesses in their deposition before the trial Court and that shows their truthfulness. Enmity is a double-edged weapon. It. no doubt, often provides motive for false implication but more often than not it also forms basis of a motive and incentive for making an attack. So, merely because there subsisted enmity between the witnesses on the one hand and the accused on the other is not sufficient to throw overboard the testimony of the witnesses, unless there is further material on which the testimony can be doubted. It is settled that where there is enmity between the prosecution witnesses and the accused, the evidence has to be scrutinized with greater care. The witnesses of the facts in their deposition as given above have clearly supported the prosecution version. There is no material contradiction in their deposition. They with-stood the test of cross-examination firmly. On a careful scrutiny of the evidence of the eyewitnesses, we find their evidence to be truthful and reliable. 15. Second argument of the learned counsel for the appellants is that the eyewitnesses produced at the trial are interested witnesses and no independent witness has been produced. He further argued that in the absence of independent witnesses, conviction could not be sustained. Relationship by itself is not sufficient to discard the evidence of witnesses as unworthy of credit in the absence of other circumstances to detract from the evidentiary value of their testimony. Where the presence of relative witnesses at the place of occurrence is natural and their evidence is corroborated by medical evidence, absence of other independent witnesses does not render prosecution case suspicious or unworthy of credence. Mere relationship cannot be a reason for disbelieving the eyewitness. Close relatives of the victim would be the most reluctant to spare the real assailants. They would never falsely involve only innocent persons merely because of enmity. Mere relationship cannot be a reason for disbelieving the eyewitness. Close relatives of the victim would be the most reluctant to spare the real assailants. They would never falsely involve only innocent persons merely because of enmity. Credibility in the witness box is more valuable in assessing evidentiary value of the testimony of witnesses than kinship. The evidence must be discarded or accepted on the merits of that evidence and not merely because a man is interested. But the Court will exercise extra caution in Evaluating the evidence of an interested person. It is not the source from which the evidence comes that decides its credibility, but it is the worth of the evidence which is the guiding factor. Thus, there is no rule that interested and inimical witnesses should be discarded outright without considering their evidence on merit. In such cases, the only rule is of caution and prudence before accepting such evidence. All the eyewitnesses have given convincing reason about their presence at the place of occurrence. Jhabboo Singh, P. W. 1 has admitted enmity between the parties. He has also given plausible reason for not sustaining any injury at the hand of the accused and looking to the explanation given by this witness it cannot be said that merely because the witness has not suffered any injury, his presence at the place of occurrence was doubtful and his evidence should be discarded. He has also given believable and valid reason for not carrying any weapon while going to receive his father Kurram Singh P. W. 2 and Pooran, P. W. 4 have also deposed likewise and after going through their evidence, we find that their presence also at the place of occurrence in the circumstances of the case cannot be doubted. In the circumstances of the case, we find that although it is true that the witnesses are interested but their testimony, as laid down by the Honble Supreme Court, has to be scrutinized with caution and care and after going through their evidence we come to the conclusion that the eye witnesses produced at the trial are truthful and reliable and conviction can be based on their testimony. 16. Now we come to the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that there is discrepancy between the medical evidence and eyewitness account and conviction cannot be based on the evidence of these eyewitnesses. 16. Now we come to the contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that there is discrepancy between the medical evidence and eyewitness account and conviction cannot be based on the evidence of these eyewitnesses. Discrepancy between the medical evidence and ocular testimony is not always fatal. Ocular account when stands corroborated by medical evidence and independent witnesses, conviction is proper. But a glaring inconsistency between the medical evidence and the eyewitness account is fatal to the prosecution case. If there is conflict between the medical evidence and oral testimony, the accused is entitled to benefit of doubt. After going through the evidence of the eyewitnesses and the post mortem examination report, we notice that there is complete harmony between the ocular version and medical evidence. Three of the accused were armed with Kantas and the fourth one used a Suja. The deceased sustained as many as 12 incised wounds and two punctured wounds, besides three abrasions which could be attributable to fall. The Doctor unerringly stated that incised wounds could be caused by Kantas, and punctured wounds by suja. The injuries suffered by the deceased are also compatible with the number of the accused appellants and their weapons. Thus, there is no inconsistency at all between the ocular and medical evidence. Rather, they fully reconcile. 17. The accused appellants committed this crime in furtherance of their common intention with premeditation and planning. All of them have rightly been convicted with sentence of life imprisonment. 18. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. 19. The order of conviction and sentence passed in respect of the accused appellants namely, Brahmswaroop, Mool Chand, Tribhuwan Singh and Nathoo Singh is maintained. They are on bail. They shall be taken into custody to serve out the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on them. 20. Judgment be certified to the lower Court immediately for reporting compliance to this Court within two months from the date of receipt. Appeal dismissed.