R.C.CHAVAN, J.:- Being aggrieved by the acquittal of seven accused persons, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Akola, of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 323 and 452 of the Penal Code, the State has appealed. The facts which led to the prosecution of the respondents are as under: 2. On 29-11-1990 deceased Vijay Pundlik Shirsat abused two relatives of the accused persons. Hence, all of them formed an unlawful assembly, armed themselves with weapons and charged at the house of Vijay. They assaulted him. The victims' mother immediately informed the police. The Police rushed to the spot and admitted the victim to Hospital. He succumbed to the injuries which had been inflicted by the accused before the police reached the spot. The victim's mother and wife too were assaulted by the accused when they attempted to rescue the victim. On a report by the victim's wife Vandana an offence was registered. 3. In the course of investigation the Police caused post mortem to be conducted on the body of Vijay, after an inquest. They examined witnesses, seized incriminating articles, sent the incriminating articles to Forensic Laboratory and on completion of investigation, charge-sheeted the accused. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Akola had committed the case to the Court of Sessions at Akola. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, to whom the case was assigned, framed charge of the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302,323 and 452 of the Penal Code against all the accused persons. They pleaded not guilty to the said charge and hence, were put on trial. In the course of trial the prosecution examined in all eleven witnesses. Upon considering the prosecution evidence in the light of the defence of denial raised, the learned trial Judge acquitted all the accused holding that the prosecution had not proved their complicity in the injuries which led to death of Vijay and injuries which were observed on the person of Vijay's relation. Aggrieved thereby the State has appealed. 4. We have heard Shri. Mirza, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Appellant/State. None appeared for the respondents and we did not find it necessary to call upon anyone to address us on behalf of the respondents. Aggrieved thereby the State has appealed. 4. We have heard Shri. Mirza, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the Appellant/State. None appeared for the respondents and we did not find it necessary to call upon anyone to address us on behalf of the respondents. Evaluation of evidence tendered before the trial Court was undertaken, with the valuable assistance from Shri. Mirza, learned A.P.P., in order to find out whether the learned trial Judge could have justifiably taken the view that the prosecution failed to prove complicity of the accused. 5. Dr. Choudhari, who was examined as P.W.8, proved notes of Post Mortem at Exh.51. They show that there was an Elliptical incised wound on the left side of the chest extending to intercoastal muscle and upwards to the back of neck cutting left common carotid artery near its origin from the aorta. This ante-mortem injury had led to the death of the victim. Dr. Choudhari, however, caused viscera to be preserved and blood samples of the victim to be taken. These blood samples were duly sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory by the Investigating Officer and the result of analysis at Exh.73 shows that the blood contained 103 milligrammes of Ethyl alcohol per 100 milliliters indicating that the victim was substantially drunk at the time of his death. 6. P.W.7 Dr. Sharma proved Medico Legal Certificates of Vandana and Kasabai at Exhs.48 and 49. Dr. Sharma stated that on 30th November, 1990 he examined Vandana and found contused swelling of 2" x 2" on the right side of the back, caused with hard and blunt object, within six hours of examination at 12.10 a.m. He found that Kasabai had contused swelling on the right side of cheek and left side on back over scapular region and on the left forearm, caused within six hours by a hard and blunt objects. Since the injured were examined at about 12.10 a.m. on 30th November, 1990 the injuries must have been caused after 6.00 p.m. on 29th November, 1990. 7. The question is, whether the respondents can be said to be the authors of the injuries which led to the death of Vijay and which were found on the persons of Kasabai and Vandana. 7. The question is, whether the respondents can be said to be the authors of the injuries which led to the death of Vijay and which were found on the persons of Kasabai and Vandana. P.W.1 Kasabai stated that the incident took place at about 9.30 p.m. Victim Vijay was standing on the steps, after purchasing some vegetable from a Vegetable Vendor and was entering the house. Raju Tobre came and asked, why Vijay had assaulted Raju's son-in-law Bhimrao. Raju's wife Sunita also came there and started shouting. All the accused persons reached with sticks and stones and assaulted Vijay in front of Kasabai's house. Vijay entered the house but was assaulted by Pandurang and his sons by sticks. Accused Gabaya @ Sanjay administered fist blows. Kasabai, her husband and daughter went to Vijay's rescue. She was assaulted by Ambadas and Charan with sticks. Pandurang hit Vandana on her back. She stated that as her son Vijay had bleeding injuries, she went to the Police Station, followed by her daughter-in-law Vandana and gave report Exh.34. The accused, according to the witness, were staying just behind her house. 8. P.W.2 Vandana substantially corroborated the account given by mother-in-law Kasabai. It may be seen that both P.W.Nos.1 and 2 did not state about any assault by any sharp object. P.W.2 Vandana denied having said to the police that she had seen Bharat and Shriram with daggers in their hands. Her report at Exh.36 shows that when the incident occurred only she, her mother-in-law and father-in-law were present in the house. Yet the prosecution has sought to make P.W.3 Malubai, sister-in-law of the victim, to be an eye-witness to the incident. This seems to have necessary to explain the incised wound, found on the person of victim. She stated that after her mother and Vandana went to Police Station and after first five accused went out, accused Nos.6 Bharat and 7 Shriram entered with daggers. Shriram caught hold of Vijay while Bharat gave a blow with dagger on Vijay's chest. Then police jeep came and Vijay was taken in the police jeep. She too contradicted a part of her police statement to the effect that she hid herself behind the outer wall due to fear. 9. Fourth eye-witness, Pundlik father of the victim. He stated that he too tried to intervene in the assault on his son but he was pushed. She too contradicted a part of her police statement to the effect that she hid herself behind the outer wall due to fear. 9. Fourth eye-witness, Pundlik father of the victim. He stated that he too tried to intervene in the assault on his son but he was pushed. Accused Pandurang, Charan and Ambadas hit his wife with sticks. They also hit his daughter-in-law. After his wife and daughter-in-law left for the Police Station, Bharat and Shriram came. Bharat was armed with dagger. Shriram caught hold of Vijay and Bharat hit on the chest of Vijay. However, P.W.4 Pundlik admitted in his cross-examination that he had not told the police that Bharat and Shriram assaulted Vijay with dagger. The police jeep then came and took Vijay to Hospital. He admitted that he had not raised any cries for help. He stated that since they did not raise any cries and since neighbours were watching T.V. in their houses, none came. He too contradicted the material portion of his police statement. 10. If the genesis of the incident is seen, it would be clear that there was hot exchange of words between members of the family of the victim and Raju Tobre, his wife, Pandurang and the other accused persons. So whether anybody raised cries or not, there would be enough din to attract the neighbours. Absence of any neighbour to depose about the incident speaks volumes about the veracity of these four witnesses from the family. The story coming from these four family members is about the only attack by stones and sticks which curiously did not cause a single injury on the person of the victim, since only one surface injury, elliptical incised wound, was found by Dr. Choudhari. 11. P.W.11 P.S.I. Narkhede, Investigating Officer stated that nobody was ready to give any statement in support of the complainant and hence, he had not cited any neighbours as witnesses. The fact that none of the neighbours was ready to support the version of the victim's family is significant. Though P.W.1 Kasabai denied that her son had a number of crimes registered, she admitted that a murder case had been filed against Vijay. The fact that none of the neighbours was ready to support the version of the victim's family is significant. Though P.W.1 Kasabai denied that her son had a number of crimes registered, she admitted that a murder case had been filed against Vijay. It was suggested to her that on the incidental evening Vijay had been assaulted by someone in the square in the locality, when he was attempting to snatch money from a vegetable vendor and that the accused were falsely implicated. She admitted that accused Pandurang is her brother. P.W.11 P.S.I. Narkhede stated that he does not remember whether four offences were registered against Vijay on that day. But he admitted that on the complaint of Pandurang an offence was registered against Vijay. He admitted that criminal cases were registered against the deceased prior to the incident. These, facts, coupled with findings by the Forensic Science Laboratory that blood of the deceased contained 103 Ml. of Ethyl Alcohol per 100 Milliliter, would show that the cause of injuries on the victim could be as suggested by the defence to the prosecution witnesses, rather than what the prosecution witnesses wanted the Court to believe. 12. The evidence about discovery and seizure of sticks, clothes and knife tendered by P.S.I. Thakur P.W.S does not receive any corroboration from Panchas P.W.9 Deelip and P.W. Kisanchand. In any case, the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory at Exh. 7 4 does not show that any of these articles seized had any blood stains. Hence, the seizures are unhelpful in connecting the accused persons to the crime. 13. In this view of the matter, we find that, the learned trial Judge justifiably held that the prosecution failed to prove complicity of the accused in assault which led to death of Vijay or injuries on Kasabai and Vandana. Consequently we hold that the learned trial Judge rightly acquitted the accused of the offence charged. 14. We, therefore, dismiss the appeal and direct that the Bail bonds, if any furnished by the respondents, shall stand cancelled.