Judgment S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.-This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 3rd/4th June, 1998 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Judicial Commissioner, Khunti (Ranchi) in Sessions Trial No. 521/96, whereby and whereunder, he has been c0nvicted for the offence under sections 302 & 307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced u/s 302 of I.P.C. to undergo imprisonment for life and further sentenced u/s 307 of I.P.C. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution, in brief, as alleged in the First Information Report is that on 13th May, 1993 at about 10 A. M., the informant Ram Pada Seth (P. W. 10) went to the shop of Chitaranjan Seth (RW. 6). When he was standing near the Verandah of the shop of Chitaranjan Seth, his elder sister in-law (Bhabi) Gurubari Devi was also standing besides him. The appellant-Ramawatar Seth while passing through the shop asked him to wait and thereafter went to his house and came back with a bag. The appellant took out a bomb from his bag and hurled the bomb on the informant. The informant Rama Pada Seth moved a little bit to save himself but the bomb hit on the right leg of his sister-in-law Gurubari Devi. Due to bomb explosion, the right leg of Gurubari Devi was blown. The people standing nearby the shop, including the shopkeeper Chitaranjan Seth also got splinter injuries. Sister-in-law of the informant was initially taken to a local doctor for first aid and thereafter they took her for treatment in R.M.C.H., Ranchi but on the way Gurubari Devi succumbed to the injuries. 3. The informant thereafter returned back to Tamar and lodged one first information Report (Ext. 3). It was alleged that the appellant was a person of criminal nature. He used to abuse the family members of the informant for which he was scolded by the informant which was the reason to hurl the bomb. 4. After investigation, the police submitted charge sheet on 24th April, 1996 under section 302 I.PC. and sections 3/4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act against the appellant Ramawatar Seth. 5. Cognizance was taken on 11th June, 1996 by the A.C.J.M. who committed the case to the Court of Session. Charges under sections 302, 307, I.PC. and u/s 3/4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act were framed. 6. and sections 3/4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act against the appellant Ramawatar Seth. 5. Cognizance was taken on 11th June, 1996 by the A.C.J.M. who committed the case to the Court of Session. Charges under sections 302, 307, I.PC. and u/s 3/4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act were framed. 6. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The trial court convicted the appellant for the offence u/ss 302 and 307 of the I.PC. The defence of the appellant was that he was innocent and has been falsely implicated in this case. 7. The prosecution in support of the case examined altogether 14(fourteen) witnesses. Most of the witnesses directly or indirectly related to the appellant and the informant. 8. Apart from the informant, Rama Pada Seth (Pw. 10), Chhote Seth (Pw. 9) is the other eye witness to the occurrence. Both of them are brother-in-law (Dewar of the deceased). Shashi Bhushan Seth (P.w.8), husband of the deceased is hearsay witness, whereas Rajendra Seth (P.w. 5) brother of the deceased and Jai Prakash Seth (P.w. 3) are the formal witnesses of inquest report and seizure list. 9. Ashutosh Kumar Sinha (P.w. 11), a Senior Scientific Officer submitted report relating to remains of the bomb. Dr. Tulsi Mahto (P.W. 13), an Associate Professor did autopsy on the body of the deceased Gurubari Devi. Pashan Surin (P.w. 12), Sub Inspector was the Investigating Officer, whereas Dr. Bansidhar Sen. Gupta (P.W. 14) is the Medical Officer who treated some of the injured and submitted injury report. 10. Curiously, Nimai Seth (Pw. 1), Brajeshwar Seth (P.w. 2), son of the shopkeeper Chitranjan Seth (nephew-Bhagna of informant), Karan Seth (P.w. 4) (brotherin-law i.e. husband of cousin sister of informant), Chitranjan Seth (Pw. 6), shopkeeper (another brother-in-law i.e. husband of cousin sister of informant) and Pradeep Seth (P.w. 7) (nephew of informant-Bhatija), all of them were declared hostile by the prosecution. 11. Nimai Seth (P.w. 1) was shown as eye witness by the prosecution which was also accepted by the said witness. But P.w.1 detracted from his statement given u/s 161 Cr.PC. before the I.O. and narrated a different story of the occurrence. According to him (P.W. 1), he was present on the place of occurrence i.e. the verandah of the shop of Chitranjan Seth on 13th May, 1993 along with two-three persons. Informant Ram Pada Seth (Pw. But P.w.1 detracted from his statement given u/s 161 Cr.PC. before the I.O. and narrated a different story of the occurrence. According to him (P.W. 1), he was present on the place of occurrence i.e. the verandah of the shop of Chitranjan Seth on 13th May, 1993 along with two-three persons. Informant Ram Pada Seth (Pw. 10) was standing in the Verandah of the shop. The deceased Gurubari Devi while carne out of shop stood by the side of Ram Pada Seth. Ram Pada Seth was holding something inside his bag. Thereafter, Ram Pada Seth and his sister-in-law (Bhabi-deceased) suddenly started quarrelling. At that point of time, he heard sound of a bomb. He along with others fled away. While fleeing, he saw that the left leg of Gurubari Devi was separated from her body. During the cross examination he accepted that he also received one splinter injury. 12. Brajeshwar Seth (RW. 2) the son of the shopkeeper Chitranjan Seth (P.w. 6) stated that on 13th May, 1993 while he was selling the goods, a number of customers were there. In the meantime, Gurubari Devi came to purchase certain items and thereafter went out. The informant Ram Pada Seth was already standing near the door of the shop. Gurubari Devi stopped in the right side of Ram Pada Seth and started talking with him. Within three minutes, he heard the sound of the bomb, whereinafter he closed the door of the shop. 13. Karan Seth (RW. 4) made similar statement that on 13th May, 1993 while he was passing through near the shop of Chitranjan Seth, he saw Ram Pada Seth standing with a bag in his hand. When he proceeded further, heard the sound of the bomb. At the place where the bomb was hurled, he saw Gurubari Devi lying and her• right leg was separated from the knee. Later on, Gurubari Devi died on way to the hospital. 14. Chitranjan Seth (P.W. 6) while accepted the place of occurrence, stated that he had no knowledge as to who murdered Gurubari Devi, but she was murdered. 15. Pradeep Seth (P.W. 7) the nephew of the informant stated that he had no knowledge of the incident. 16. Later on, Gurubari Devi died on way to the hospital. 14. Chitranjan Seth (P.W. 6) while accepted the place of occurrence, stated that he had no knowledge as to who murdered Gurubari Devi, but she was murdered. 15. Pradeep Seth (P.W. 7) the nephew of the informant stated that he had no knowledge of the incident. 16. Counsel for the appellant placed much stress on the evidence of some of the prosecution witnesses who were declared hostile, particularly, Nimai Seth (PW.1), Brajeshwar Seth (P.W. 2) and Karan Seth (P.W. 4) to suggest that there was a bag in the hand of the informant. He was holding something inside it, might be bomb, which accidentally fell and caused death of Gurubari Devi. 17. But such suggestion cannot be accepted in view of the evidence given by other witnesses including the eye witness, Chhuthe Seth (P.w. 9) and Ram Pada Seth (P.W. 10), the informant. The plea that the evidence of P.w. 10 should be doubted as he is supposed to have developed a story, cannot be accepted in the backdrop of direct evidence which was also corroborated by other evidence such as medical evidence. (Ext. 1). P.W. 10, Ram Pada Seth-informant is the eye witness of the occurrence. It is also evident from the statement of the witnesses who were declared hostile. He (P.w. 10) stated that on 13th May, 1993 at about 10 A.M., he had gone to the shop of Chitranjan Seth (P.w. 6) to purchase some items. His sister-in-law (Bhabi) Gurubari Oevi (deceased) was also standing near him. In the meantime, the appellant Ramawatar Seth while passing through abused him and told "Thahro Shala Hum Aa Rahe Hai', The appellant Ramawatar Seth thereafter went to his house, returned with a bag and took out a bomb from the bag and hurled the bomb on him. To save him, he shifted a little bit, as such the bomb could not hit him. But unfortunately, the bomb hit on the right leg of his sister-in-law (Bhabi) Gurubari Oevi and exploded, due to which the right leg of Gurubari Devi was blown. He specifically stated that the right leg below the knee of Gurubari Devi was separated and splinters of the bomb also hit him and some other persons such as Chitranjan Seth, Nimai Seth etc. He specifically stated that the right leg below the knee of Gurubari Devi was separated and splinters of the bomb also hit him and some other persons such as Chitranjan Seth, Nimai Seth etc. He (P.W. 10), thereafter took his injured Bhabi to Sarjamdih Hospital for treatment but doctor advised him to take her to R.M.C.H., Ranchi. But when they were taking her in a Mini Bus to Ranchi, Gurubari Devi succumbed to the injuries on the way near Bundu. Thereafter, they brought the dead body of Gurubari Devi to Jamar Police Station and lodged First Information Report (Ext. 3). Motive has been explained by the informant (P W. 10) that the appellant Ramawatar Seth was a regular drunker and used to abuse people, being a person of criminal nature, he (Pw. 10) used to chide him, which annoyed the appellant. 18. PW. 10 gave detailed version of the incident. He also stated that the Police examined him, seized the dead body of Gurubari devi, sent it for autopsy. Seizure list was prepared. Remains of the bomb (particles) were collected from the place of occurrence, its seizure list was prepared and sent for the forensic test. He identified the accused on the dock. This witness (Pw. 10) stood to the test of cross examination, except for minor contradiction, nothing cogent could be elicited by the defence to doubt his evidence. 19. Chhotu Seth (PW. 9) is the other witness, who claimed to be the eye witness during the trial. But from his statement u/s. 161, it appears that he was simply a hearsay witness before the Police. He (P.w. 9) is a full brother of the informant i.e. brother-in-law (Dewar) of the deceased. pw. 9 Chhotu Seth stated that on 13th May, 1993 at about 10 A.M., he was sitting on the Verandah of the shop or Chitranjan Seth (Pw. 6). Nimai Seth (Pw.1), Karan Seth (Pw. 4) were also present. His brother Ram Pada Seth (Pw. 10) and sister-in-law, Gurubari Devi were talking on the Verandah of the shop. He saw the appellant Ramawatar Seth while going towards his house started abusing Ram Pada Seth. Some quarrel took place between them, whereinafter, the appellant Ramawatar Seth brought a bag from his house, took out a bomb and hurled it on Ram Pada Seth. But the bomb hit Gurubari Devi and her right leg was blown. He saw the appellant Ramawatar Seth while going towards his house started abusing Ram Pada Seth. Some quarrel took place between them, whereinafter, the appellant Ramawatar Seth brought a bag from his house, took out a bomb and hurled it on Ram Pada Seth. But the bomb hit Gurubari Devi and her right leg was blown. She fell down and became unconscious. Thereafter his brother, Sashi Bhushan Seth (Pw. 8) reached the place of occurrence to whom he (Pw. 9) told the incident. He further stated that the blood and remains of the bomb scattered on the ~O. The splinters of the bomb also hit Chitranjan Seth, Nimai Seth and Ram Pad a Seth who got splinters injury on their abdomen, neck and leg respectively. Injured Gurubari Devi was taken to her house and after managing a vehicle, she was taken for treatment at Ranchi, but she died on the way near Bundu. pw. 9 stated that there was enmity between the appellant Ramawatar Seth and the informant Ram Pada Seth since some time. pw. 9 further stated that two of his brothers, namely, Subhash and Chhote Lal werE also murdered by the appellant Ramawatar Seth and a criminal case is pending against the appellant Ramawatar Seth. During cross examination, pw. 9 admitted that he was examined by the Police just after the occurrence but stated that his injured Bhabi was not removed from the PO. before the arrival of the Police. 20. Sashi Bhushan Seth (Pw. 8) is the husband of deceased Gurubari Devi. He stated that he having heard the sound of explosion of bomb from his door, rushed to the shop of Chitranjan Seth (P.w. 6) and found his wife Gurubari Devi lying unconscious. One of her legs was separated from her body and found remains of bomb scattered here and there on the PO. They brought his injured wife to his house then arranged a vehicle to take her for treatment at Ranchi but she died on the way near Bundu. He (P.w. 8) further stated that he saw Ram Pada Seth (Pw. 10) Chitranjan Seth (Pw. 6), Nimai Seth (P.w. 1), Jyot Narain Seth and his Mausi, Ragni 'Devi at the PO. Chitranjan Seth (Pw. 6), Nimai Seth (Pw. 1) and his brother Ram Pada Seth (P.w. 10) had sustained splinters injury on their abdomen, neck and knee respectively. They were sent for treatment. 10) Chitranjan Seth (Pw. 6), Nimai Seth (P.w. 1), Jyot Narain Seth and his Mausi, Ragni 'Devi at the PO. Chitranjan Seth (Pw. 6), Nimai Seth (Pw. 1) and his brother Ram Pada Seth (P.w. 10) had sustained splinters injury on their abdomen, neck and knee respectively. They were sent for treatment. He came to know from his brother Ram Pada Seth (P.w. 10) that the appellant Ramawatar Seth hurled a bomb on Ram Pada Seth which hit his wife Gurubari Devi. This witness stood to the test during the cross examination and his evidence is of corroborative value. 21. Jai Prakash Seth (P.w. 3) is a formal witness of seizure list (Ext. 1), whereas Rajendra Seth (P.w. 5), brother of the deceased is the formal witness of inquest report (Ext. 2). Chitranjan Seth (P.w. 6) and Pradeep Seth (P.w. 7) were declared hostile by the prosecution. 22. Ashutosh Kumar Sinha (P.w. 11), a Senior Scientific Officer while posted in the Forensic Department in R.M.C.H., Ranchi said that he received a Card Board Box on 17th June, 1993 containing remains of exploded bomb from A.C.J.M., Khunti. He examined the remains which were iron nail, iron ball and pieces of Jute spring. When he washed the container, found the residue sensitive to explosive mixture of arsenic sulphide and potassium chloride. He opined that the contains were remains of exploded home made bomb. He proved his written report (Ext. 4) containing the signature of Y. Poddar, the then Regional Director. 23. Dr. Tulsi Mahto (P.w. 13), Medical Officer who held the autopsy on the dead body of the deceased Gurbari Devi on 14th May, 1993 at 11 hours and deposed as follows: "Externally.-The right foot & leg. from the lower part of right knee was lying separately. On inspection of the wound of separation, it was extensively lacerated and the right fibic & fibuler bones were broken into pieces & few fragments are missing. The margins of the wound bears tissue-tags with laceration of soft tissues and blood vessels. There is infiltration of blood and blood clots in the soft tissues and bony tissues at the sight of separation. There were multiple small abrasion with tatoring size varying from pin point to 1/2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. size in the right fore arm medial side. Internally.-All the organs are normal and pale. There is infiltration of blood and blood clots in the soft tissues and bony tissues at the sight of separation. There were multiple small abrasion with tatoring size varying from pin point to 1/2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. size in the right fore arm medial side. Internally.-All the organs are normal and pale. The stomache contains undigested food material in pasty form 75 grams with normal mucus. The urinary bladder was empty and the uterus normal and non-pregnant. 24. He (P.w. 13) was of the opinion that the external injuries might have been caused by bomb and all the injuries were ante mortem in nature caused due to explosion. The carbon copy of the post mortem report was accepted as Ext. 9 which was proved by him. 25. Dr. Tulsi Mahto (P.w. 13) clarified that the original post mortem report and a duplicate copy were fowarded to the I.O. and the S.P. But he had no knowledge as to what happened with the original post mortem report. But he proved the carbon copy of the same (Ext. 9). 26. Pasan Surin (P.w. 12), S.I. Police was the Investigating Officer. He stated that on 13th May, 1993 while he was posted as Officer-in-Charge of Tamar Police Station, Ram Pada Seth (P.w. 10) came and submitted written report to him which was registered as Tamar P.S. Case No. 52/93 under section 302 of the I.P.C. He proved the F.I.R. (Ext. 5) and stated that Ram Pad a Seth (P.w. 10) also brought the dead body of Gurbari Devi. The inquest report (Ext. 2) was prepared and dead body was sent to R.M.C.H., Ranchi for post mortem. He also examined the injuries on the person of Ram Pado Seth and prepared his injury report (Ext. 6). He stated that the injuries on Nimai Seth (P.W. 1) and Chitranjan Seth (P.w. 6) were also examined and injury Reports (Exts. 6/1 & 6/2) were prepared. 27. Chhotu Seth (P.w. 9) and Jai Prakash Seth (P.w. 3) were also examined, apart from Ram Pado Seth (P.w. 10), in the Police Station on the said date. Thereafter, he proceeded for inspection of the P.O. and found huge quantity of blood on the P.O. He also found remains of bomb scattered on the P.O. Blood stained earth was collected and seizure list (Ext. 7) was prepared. They were sent for chemical examination by a letter (Ext. 8). Thereafter, he proceeded for inspection of the P.O. and found huge quantity of blood on the P.O. He also found remains of bomb scattered on the P.O. Blood stained earth was collected and seizure list (Ext. 7) was prepared. They were sent for chemical examination by a letter (Ext. 8). He further stated that Nimai Seth (P.w. 1), Chitranjan Seth (P.w. 6) and Pradip Seth (P.w. 7) were examined on the P.O. He also examined Brajeshwar Seth (P.w. 2), Karan Seth (P.w. 4), Shashi Bhushan Seth (P.W. 8) and Rabri Devi. Nimai Seth (P.w. 1), Karan Seth (P.w. 4), Chitranjan Seth (P.w. 6) and Pradip Seth (P.W. 7) and all of them fully supported the prosecution case before him. 28. During the cross examination, Pasan Surin (P.W. 12), the I.O. admitted that Chhotu Seth (P.W. 9) was not an eye witness to the occurrence and he (1.0.) went to the place of occurrence at 5 P.M. on 13th May, 1993 and and did not find any grocery item scattered in the P.O. 29. From the evidence of P.w. 14, Dr. Bansidhar Sen Gupta, it appears that on 13th May, 1993 while he was posted at Tamar Primary Health Centre as Medical Officer, at about 9.30 P.M. he examined Chitranjan Seth (P.w. 6) and found certain injuries such as abrasion on the right abdomen of 1/2" x 1/2" size. He opined that such injuries can be caused by small pieces of stones if hit with high speed. He also examined Nimai Seth (P.w. 1) and found abrasion on the left side of neck each 1/2" x1/2". According to him the injuries were simple and caused by H.B. substance such as speedy small pieces of stones. He also examined Ram Pado Seth-Informant (P.w. 10) and found abrasion below right knee of size 1/4" x 1/4", simple and caused by H.B. substance such as small pieces of stones if hit with high speed. 30. If the evidence of the eye witness and informant, Ram Pado Seth (P.w. 10) alone is considered, it will be evident that such evidence was corroborated by evidence of other evidences such as Chhotu Seth (P.w. 9), Shashi Bhushan Seth (P.w. 8), apart from medical evidence submitted by Dr. Tulsi Mahto (P.w. 13) and injury report(s) submitted by Dr. Bansidhar Sen Gupta (P.w. 14). Tulsi Mahto (P.w. 13) and injury report(s) submitted by Dr. Bansidhar Sen Gupta (P.w. 14). The evidence of the I.O. (P.w. 12), also shows that the investigation proceeded in the right direction to prove the charges beyond all reasonable doubt. 31. In the facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to differ with the finding of the trial court. 32. There being no merit, this appeal is dismissed. Lakshman Uraon, J.-I agree.