Judgment R. S. MOHITE, J. ( 1 ) THE aforesaid 3 appeals impugn a common judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge osmanabad on 8-7-1999 in Sessions Case no. 104/98. Criminal Appeal No. 294/99 is an appeal against conviction filed by the 4 convicted accused i. e. Madhukar Sidram yamgar @ Patil (original accused No. 1), sadashiv Manik Yamgar (original accused no. 2), Laxman Manik Yamgar (original accused No. 4) and Dattu Shahani Yamgar (original accused No. 5) (hereinafter where context required referred to as accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 respectively ). ( 2 ) CRIMINAL Appeal No. 384/99 has been filed by the State against the acquittal of all the original 8 accused i. e. Madhukar Sidram yamgar, Sadashiv Manik Yamgar, bhagwant Gunwant Yamgar, Laxman manik Yamgar, Dattu Shahaji Yamgar, sudhakar Sidram Yamgar, Prabhakar @ padmakar Sidram Yamgar and Shivaji irrappa Yamgar for the offence under section 148 of I. P. C. Criminal Appeal 385/99 is yet another appeal against acquittal filed by the State against accused Bhagwat gunwant Yamgar (accused No. 3) Sudhakar sidram Yamgar (accused No. 6), Prabhakar @ Padmakar Sidram Yamgar (accused No. 7) and Shivaji Irrappa Yamgar (accused No. 8) for offences punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of I. P. C. It appears that the State was required to file 2 appeals against acquittal because the 1st appeal against acquittal was limited to the question of acquittal under section 148 and it was thought fit by the State to expand the scope of the challenge to the acquittal of the accused. By the impugned judgment and order the trial Court convicted accused no. 1 Madhukar Sidram Yamgar, accused no. 2 Sadashiv Manik Yamgar, accused No. 4 Laxman Manik Yamgar and accused No. 5 Dattu Shahaji Yamgar of an offence punishable under section 302 r/w 34 of I. P. C. and sentenced them to suffer RI for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each, in default to suffer further RI for one year. 2 Sadashiv Manik Yamgar, accused No. 4 Laxman Manik Yamgar and accused No. 5 Dattu Shahaji Yamgar of an offence punishable under section 302 r/w 34 of I. P. C. and sentenced them to suffer RI for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- each, in default to suffer further RI for one year. All the accused were acquitted of the offences punishable under sections 147 and 148 of the i. P. C. Accused No. 3 Bhagwat Gunwant yamgar, accused No. 6 Sudhakar Sidram yamgar, accused No. 7 Prabhakar @ padmakar Sidram Yamgar @ Patil and accused No. 8 shivaji Irappa Yamgar were also acquitted of the charge under section 302 read with 34 of the I. P. C. It was directed that if the fine was recovered, an amount of rs. 10,000/- be paid to (P. W. 3) i. e. complainant Bhagwan Shivram Yamgar. ( 3 ) THE brief facts of the prosecution case were as under.- (a) Yamgarwadi is a small village situated in Taluka Tulzapur Dist. Osmanabad. The evidence indicates that the population of this village consists of only 300 to 400 villagers. Small as a population was, the same was vertically divided into 2 opposing enmical political groups. One group was led by (P. W. 8) who was the Police Patil of the village by name Haridas M. Patil. The family of the 2 deceased in this case as well as most of the principal witnesses belonged to the group of this Police Patil. The other group was led by the Sarpanch of the village i. e. accused No. 7 Prabhakar @ padmakar Sidram Yamgar. All the accused in this case are relatives of the said Sarpanch prabhakar @ Padmakar. (b) The record indicates that since 1995 there had been violent incidents between these 2 groups in the village, resulting in criminal cases filed by one group against members of the other. On 25-8-1995 a complaint had been filed by one Daulat B. Patil against 21 accused which included accused no. 7 Sarpanch Prabhakar and some other accused in this case being accused No. 1, accused No. 2, accused No. 3, accused No. 5 and accused No. 6. On 25-8-1995 a complaint had been filed by one Daulat B. Patil against 21 accused which included accused no. 7 Sarpanch Prabhakar and some other accused in this case being accused No. 1, accused No. 2, accused No. 3, accused No. 5 and accused No. 6. The same complaint was registered at the Tamalwadi Police Station and related to an incident in the village which occurred on 25-8-1995 wherein the teeth of the complainant Daulat had been broken and several persons had been injured due to stone throwing. The police had recorded a crime under sections 147, 148, 149, 325, 323 of I. P. C. read with section 135 of the bombay Police Act and after investigation had filed charge-sheet in the Court of JMFC at Tulzapur. Some of the witnesses in the present case i. e. (P. W. 5), (P. W. 8), (P. W. 9) and (P. W. 10) were also witnesses in the aforesaid case. One of the deceased in the present case i. e. Krishna B. Yamgar was also a witness in the said case. (c) Yet another case had been registered by the police on a complaint filed by one satish Namdev Yamgar against 5 accused who were accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 in the present case. This case had been registered at the Tamalwadi Police Station on 14-3-1996 and arose out of an incident dated 14-3-1996 wherein the allegation was that the accused had thrown stones and stabbed the complainant. The said case was registered for offences punishable under sections 147,148,149 and 325 of the I. P. C. read with section 135 of the Bombay Police act. Some of the witnesses in the present case (P. W. 4) Abhiman Sitaram Yamgar, (P. W. 5) Maruti Balwant Sarwade and (P. W. 6) Sitaram Govind Yamgar were also the witnesses in the aforesaid case. One of the deceased in the present case Krishna yamgar was also one of the important witness in the said case. After investigation, the police had filed charge-sheet in the said case and this case was also pending. (d) The record indicates that apart from the 2 cases referred to hereinabove, filed against the Sarpanch and his relatives/supporters, the accused Nos. 2 and 3 in the present case had also filed complaints against some of the prosecution witnesses in this case such as (PW. 4) Abhiman yamgar, (PW. (d) The record indicates that apart from the 2 cases referred to hereinabove, filed against the Sarpanch and his relatives/supporters, the accused Nos. 2 and 3 in the present case had also filed complaints against some of the prosecution witnesses in this case such as (PW. 4) Abhiman yamgar, (PW. 5) Maruti Sarwade, (PW. 6) sitaram Yamgar, (PW. 9) Pratap Sarwade and (PW. 10) Kisan Khandu Yamgar. In short, this small village was a beehive of political strife. The 2 groups which were opposing each other were violently active and there was stress and strain in the life of the villagers living in Yamgarwadi. (e) The present incident occurred on 17-7-1998 at the farm house of the complainant (PW. 3) Bhagvan which was situated in his field about one furlong away from village Yamgarwadi. It is the prosecution case that about 15 days prior to the incident the sarpanch i. e. accused No. 7 Prabhakar @ padmakar met one of the deceased Krishna and informed him that all the members belonging to Krishnas group were ready to settle their disputes amicably. He told krishna that he was the only person who was not ready for compromise. He requested krishna to compromise their disputes. Krishna refused and on such refusal, accused No. 7 prabhakar @ Padmakar threatened Krishna that he would see to him later. This incident, and threat was witnessed by (PW. 4) Abhiman. Apart from talking to the deceased Krishna accused No. 7 Prabhakar @ Padmakar had also approached (PW. 7) laxman, brother of Krishna and informed that all the persons except Krishna were ready to settle the dispute amicably. He had requested Laxman to persuade Krishna to join the settlement and further informed him that if Krishna disagreed to settle, the enmity between them would increase. (PW. 7) Laxman had informed accused No. 7 that he would do his best to pursuade his brother krishna. Accordingly, he had attempted to pursuade Krishna to compromise the dispute but Krishna had refused to effect any compromise. The attempts made by accused no. 7 to pursuade Krishna to accept the compromise were known to other villagers and were deposed to by (PW. 2) who is the father of Krishna, as well as by (PW. 6 ). (PW. Accordingly, he had attempted to pursuade Krishna to compromise the dispute but Krishna had refused to effect any compromise. The attempts made by accused no. 7 to pursuade Krishna to accept the compromise were known to other villagers and were deposed to by (PW. 2) who is the father of Krishna, as well as by (PW. 6 ). (PW. 6) Sitaram was a person who was sitting in front of the Grampanchayat office when accused No. 7 had talked to Krishna regarding the proposed compromise. (f) On 17-7-1998 the 2 deceased i. e. Krishna and Bharat who were the sons of the complainant i. e. Bhagwan Yamgar left the house of Bhagwan in the village in order to go to sleep in their farm house situ- ated in their field about a furlong away from the village. (g) On the same day at about 11. 30 to 11. 45 p. m. , (PW. 5) Maruti Sarvade who was a resident of village Yamgarwadi went towards his cattle shed in order to serve fodder to his cattle. His cattle shed was situated on the western side of the house of accused No. 7. The house of (PW. 5) Maruti and house of accused No. 7 was only about 10 feet apart. There was a electric pole in between the house of accused No. 7 and the house of (PW. 5) Maruti. When he was carrying the fodder, he saw the accused in front of the flour mill which adjoined the house of accused No. 7. They were talking with each other. He saw 5 to 6 persons in the light of the electric bulb on the pole. While he was watching, accused No. 5 Dattu came there and told the other accused persons that the 2 deceased le. Krishna and bharat (who were real brothers) were sleeping at their farm house. On hearing this news, all the accused persons got up and went inside the house of accused No. 7. (PW. 5) then went into his house and retired for the night, (h) (PW. 4) Abhiman was another villager residing in village Yamgarwadi. His house was about 25 to 30 feet away from the house of accused No. 7 Prabhakar. There was electric pole in front of the house of accused no. 7 and there was electric bulb fixed on the said poll. 4) Abhiman was another villager residing in village Yamgarwadi. His house was about 25 to 30 feet away from the house of accused No. 7 Prabhakar. There was electric pole in front of the house of accused no. 7 and there was electric bulb fixed on the said poll. There was also an electric pole in front of the house of (PW. 4) Abhiman. On 18-7-1998 at about 12 to 12. 15 midnight, (PW. 4) Abhiman heard the sound of walking feet of several persons. He got up from his bed and looked towards the road. He saw all the accused, in the light of the electric bulb, going by the road leading outside the village. He saw a sword in the hand of accused No. 4 Laxman and a sattur in the hand of accused No. 1 Madhukar. After the accused dis-appeared from the site, this witness went back to sleep in his house, (i) (PW. 6) Sitaram was a person who was residing in the village Yamgarwadi and his house was adjacent to the road which led to the farm house of the complainant bhagwan. There was an electric pole having a bulb in front of his house. He woke up from his sleep between 2 to 2. 30 p. m. In the light of the electric bulb, he saw all the accused coming from the bank of the stream i. e. from the farm house of the complainant. He saw all the accused moving towards the village. He thereafter, went back to sleep, (j) At about 7. 00 a. m. on 18-7-1998, the brother of the complainant (PW. 3) named ananda came to the house of Bhagwan and informed him that his 2 sons had been killed in the farm house. (PW. 3) Bhagwan alongwith his wife, his daughter-in-law and several other persons rushed to their farm house. They found that one of their son bharat was lying dead in front of the farm house and there were severe injuries inflicted by sharp cutting objects on his person. The other son Krishna was lying in the bullock-cart and he also had several injuries on his person inflicted by sharp cutting objects. The entire scene, at the farm house was ghastly and shocking. (PW. 3) then informed about what he had seen to the Police Paul (PW. 8) Haridas Patil. The other son Krishna was lying in the bullock-cart and he also had several injuries on his person inflicted by sharp cutting objects. The entire scene, at the farm house was ghastly and shocking. (PW. 3) then informed about what he had seen to the Police Paul (PW. 8) Haridas Patil. Police patil then personally went to the farm house and saw the scene there. He then went to the Police Station at about 9. 15 a. m. and orally informed the police about the commission of the double murder, (k) The information given by (P. W. 8) Police Patil haridas was received by (P. W. 25) p. S. I. Shoukat Abdul Jamidar attached to the Tamalwadi Police Station. He made an endorsement to that effect in the station diary, informed the higher authorities on the telephone and went to the spot of the incident i. e. the farm house of the Complainant alongwith his police staff. He reached the spot at about 10. 00 a. m. , recorded the first information (Ex. 52) given by the Complainant Bhagwan. He than called 2 Panch witnesses and prepared a spot Panchnama (Exh. 59. ). From the spot he seized several articles including a stick, woollen blanket, pillow, dhoti and samples of blood stained earth. He then prepared 2 inquest panchnamas, one of the dead body of Bharat (Exh. 60) and the other of the dead body of krishna (Exh. 61 ). He then sent the 2 dead bodies alongwith Police Constable khanapure to the Tulzapur Rural hospital for conduction of the post-mortem on them. As some names were appearing in the F. I. R. , he had sent some police staff to search for the accused and these persons returned at 1. 30 p. m. P. S. I. Jamadarthen deputed one constable Bansode to go to Tamalwadi police station and to direct the P. S. O. to register the crime. Alongwith this Constable he sent a letter (Exh. 104) addressed to the p. S. O. Tamalwadi. (P. W. 23) Tanajirao chavan who was the Dy. S. P. then came to the scene of the offence and as per direction issued by Superintendent of Police the investigation was taken over by the Dy. S. P. (P. W. 23) Tanajirao Chavan on 18-7-1998. (1) (P. W. 23) Tanajirao Chavan then arrested accused No. 1 Madhukar, accused no. (P. W. 23) Tanajirao chavan who was the Dy. S. P. then came to the scene of the offence and as per direction issued by Superintendent of Police the investigation was taken over by the Dy. S. P. (P. W. 23) Tanajirao Chavan on 18-7-1998. (1) (P. W. 23) Tanajirao Chavan then arrested accused No. 1 Madhukar, accused no. 2 -Sadashiv and accused No. 3 Bhagwat on 18-7-1998 under a panchnama which was recorded between 5. 00 p. m. and 6. 00 p. m. while effecting the arrest it was noticed that there were blood stains on the shirt of accused No. 1 Madhukar and on the dhoti of accused No. 2 Sadashiv. However, no blood was seen on the clothes of accused No. 3 Bhagwat. The police seized the blood stained clothes of accused Nos. 1 and 2 as aforesaid and did not seize the clothes of accused No. 3 as no blood stains were found on them. All these facts were recorded in the arrest panchnama (Exh. 63) dated 18-7-1998. On 19-7-1998 Dy. S. P. Tanajirao Chavan arrested accused No. 4 laxman. The payzama worn by accused No. 4 was found stained with blood and the same was seized under an arrest cum seizure panchnama (Exh. 67 ). The other accused however, could not be found on that day. On 19-7-1998 (P. W. 23) Dy. S. P. Tanajirao Chavan directed the Kotwal to issue a proclamation by beat of drums in the Yamgarwadi village. This proclamation was made as per a written order issued by dy. S. P. Tanajirao Chavan dated 19-7-1998 which was to the effect that if any person knew anything about the murder of Krishna and Bharat then he should personally give such information to the Dy. S. P. Tulzapur and that the same of the informant would be kept secret. In accordance with this direction (P. W. 18) Bhanudas who was Kotwal of village Nandurgi situated about 2 k. m. from Yamgarwadi effected the proclamation at village Yamgarwadi by beat of drums on 19-7-1998 and 20-7-1998. He submitted a report about the execution of the order to the Dy. S. P. Tulzapur. (m) As a result of the proclamation by beat of drums, information started trickling into the police. He submitted a report about the execution of the order to the Dy. S. P. Tulzapur. (m) As a result of the proclamation by beat of drums, information started trickling into the police. The statement of (P. W. 4) Abhiman and (P. W. 5) Maruti who had seen the accused persons proceeding towards the farm house were recorded by the police on 20-7-1998. The statement of (P. W. 6) Sitaram who has seen the accused returning from the farm house to the village at about 2. 00 p. m. was recorded by the police on 21-7-1998. On 20-7-1998 Dy. S. P. Tanajirao Chavan arrested accused No. 5 dattu under a panchanama (Exh. 74) and a blood stained trouser on the person of accused No. 5 was seized. (P. W. 23) then recorded the statement of several other witnesses and on 24-7-1998, as he was required to proceed on leave, he handed the investigation back to (P. W. 25) Shoukat Jamadar. (n) On 25-7-1998 accused No. 2 sadashiv made a statement that he was ready to produce a weapon concealed by him. The Investigation Officer P. S. I. Shoukat jamadar recorded this memorandum statement (Exh. 87) and proceeded with the accused in a Police jeep. Accused No. 2 sadashiv led the police - cum-panch party towards a spot near the farm house of Complainant Bhagwan. He went towards the east side in the field of one Dulange where there was a sell and produced a knife from the heap of earth which was adjoining the well. The said knife was found to be blood stained and the same was seized under a panchanama (Exh. 87-A ). After returning to the Police Station on the same day, on interrogation accused No. 5 Dattu made a statement that he was ready to produce a sattur which he had concealed. The Investigating Officer collected 2 panchas and recorded the memorandum statement. Thereafter accused No. 5 Dattu led the policecum-panch party in the police jeep to the farm house of the Complainant. The accused then went towards the east and from the field near the well he produced a sattur which was hidden in the heap of stones near the well. While this discovery was being made it was raining at the spot. The Investigating Officer seized the sattur from the said spot under a panchanama (Exh. The accused then went towards the east and from the field near the well he produced a sattur which was hidden in the heap of stones near the well. While this discovery was being made it was raining at the spot. The Investigating Officer seized the sattur from the said spot under a panchanama (Exh. 88-A), (o) On 27-7-1998 accused No. 1 madhukar made a statement that he has concealed a weapon and was ready to produce the same. Investigating Officer called two panchas and in their presence, he recorded a memorandum statement of accused No. 1. Accused No. 1 then led the police-cum-panch party to the farm house of the Complainant. He took out a Sattur from the bush on the southern bandh of the field. The said satur was found to be blood stained and the same was seized under the Panchanama (Exh. 71-A ). When this discovery was being effected, it was raining. On the same day i. e. on 27-7-1998, accused No. 4 Laxman disclosed that he had concealed a sword used in the crime. 2 panchas were called by the Investigating officer and memorandum statement of accused No. 4 was recorded. Thereafter accused No. 4 led the police-cum-panch parry to a spot near the farm house of the complainant and from the field of one Shripati, he produced a sword which was concealed in the bushes. The sword was found to be blood stained and the same was seized under a Panchanama (Exh. 72-A ). (p) On 23-8-1998 the Dy. S. P. Tulzapur directed (P. W. 24) Police Head Constable shaikh Abdul Harish Abdul Karib to carry some of the seized property i. e. weapons, clothes, blood samples etc. to the office of the Chemical Analyser at Aurangabad. Accordingly, all these articles in sealed pack- ets were carried to the Chemical Analyser under the requisition letter (Exh. 102 ). The chemical Analyser submitted his reports on 19-11-1998. It may be mentioned here that the reports pertaining to the blood group the accused though received, were not produced in evidence but the one of the report (Exh. 18) indicated that the blood found on the samples of earth taken from the spot and from the clothes of the deceased was of b group. The shirt seized from accused No. 1 Madhukar was found to contain blood stains ranging from. 18) indicated that the blood found on the samples of earth taken from the spot and from the clothes of the deceased was of b group. The shirt seized from accused No. 1 Madhukar was found to contain blood stains ranging from. 5 p. m. to 1 c. m. in diameter, on both sleeves, the blood stains being of group b which was the same blood group of the deceased. The dhoti seized from accused No. 2 Sadashiv was found to contain few blood stains ranging from about 1 cm. to 2 cm. in diameter spread at places, these blood stains also being of b group i. e. the blood of the deceased. The trouser seized from accused No. 4 Laxman contained 2 blood stains, each of about 2 c. m. in diameter, on the lower portion of the right leg and 2 more blood stains of about 1 cm. in diameter, on the lower portion of the left leg, all these blood stains being of b group i. e. that of the deceased. The pajyama seized from accused No. 5 was found to have few blood stains ranging from. 1 c. m. to 2 c. m. in diameter on the front portion. This blood was found to be human blood, though the blood group could not be determined. In so far as the weapons were concerned, the dagger seized at the behest of accused No. 2 was found to have blood stains on the blade but no blood was detected on the 3 other weapons being a Koyta, sword and katta said to have been recovered at the behest of accused Nos. 1,4and 5 respectively, (q) On the completion of the investigation, the Investigation Officer filed charge- sheet in the Court of the JMFC Tulzapur. ( 4 ) ON the committal of the case to the court of Sessions for trial, the trial Court framed a charge and the trial of the accused began. To prove its case, the prosecution examined in all 25 witnesses. ( 4 ) ON the committal of the case to the court of Sessions for trial, the trial Court framed a charge and the trial of the accused began. To prove its case, the prosecution examined in all 25 witnesses. The main witnesses examined by the prosecution were the Complainant Bhagwan Yamgar (P,w. 3) to prove the motive, (P. W. 4) Abhiman yamgar and (P. W. 5) Maruti Sarwade to prove the motive and the sighting of the accused together on the night of the incident and before the occurrence, (P. W. 6) sitaram Yamagar to prove the notice as well as the sighting of the accused returning from the scene of the offence, (P. W. 7) laxman the brother of the deceased to prove the enmity and motive, (P. W. 1) Dr. Kartik yadav to prove the post-mortem conducted on Bharat, (P. W. 2) Dr. Sujata Patil to prove the post mortem conducted on the body of krishna, (P. W. 8) Haridas i. e. Police Patil and (P. W. 9) Pratap Sarwade to prove the spot panchanama and inquest panchanama, (P. W. 10) Kisan Yamgar to prove the seizure of blood stained clothes from accused nos. 1 and 2, (P. W. 11) Ananda Kamble to prove the seizure of the clothes of the deceased, (P. W. 12) Ananda Joshi and (P. W. 13) Mahadeo Badure to prove the seizure of the clothes from the person of accused No. 4 Laxman, (P. W. 14) Shankar Lobhe to prove the discovery of a sattur at the behest of accused No. 1 and the further discovery of the sword on the behest of accused No. 4, (P. W. 15) Tamij Shaikh to prove the seizure of trouser on the person of accused No. 5, (P. W. 20) Sunil Jadhav to prove the discovery of knife at the beheast of accused No. 2 sadashiv and the discovery of sattur on behest of accused No. 5 Dattu, (P. W. 21) appa Bansure to prove the panchanama relating to the seizure of trouser of accused No. 5 Dattu, (P. W. 19) Nagesh Raut the police photographer who took the photographs of the bodies. The other witnesses examined were Police witnesses who had carried the bodies, the Police Head Constable who had registered the crime and the two Police Officers who had investigated the crime. The other witnesses examined were Police witnesses who had carried the bodies, the Police Head Constable who had registered the crime and the two Police Officers who had investigated the crime. The prosecution also produced several documents including the post-mortem notes, one C. A. s. reports and two charge-sheets pertaining to the earlier offences. On the basis of such oral and documentary evidence, the trial Court vide the impugned Judgment and order convicted accused Nos. 1,2,4 and 5 as aforesaid while acquitting the other accused. ( 5 ) BEING aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order the accused persons as well as the State have filed the 3 appeals as aforesaid. ( 6 ) WE have heard both the sides and perused the record. On behalf of the accused persons it was contended that the trial Court had wrongly believed the evidence of the prosecution witnesses to convict the accused. It was argued that admittedly, there was enmity between the principal witnesses and the accused persons. All the principal in this case such as (P. W. 4), (P. W. 5), (P. W. 6), (P. W. 9) and (P. W. 10) were also witnesses in one or other of the earlier cases which have been filed against some accused or persons belonging to their group. Similarly, these very same persons were also accused in other cases filed by accused No. 2 or accused No. 3. That this being the situation, these principal witnesses were enmical witnesses and reliance for the purpose of conviction on these witnesses ought not to have been placed by the trial Court for convicting accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. The evidence of these witnesses was also criticized as being un-natu-ral. It was argued that (P. W. 4) was admittedly, an accused in a case lodged by one of the accused in the present case. . His evidence was vague and he only talked about weapons being carried by accused No. 1 and accused No. 4. That there was no reason to him for wake up at mid-night only to see the accused persons proceeding towards the farm house. (P. W. 4) was also a witness in a case against accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, (P. W. 5) and (P. W. 6) were also witnesses against accused Nos. That there was no reason to him for wake up at mid-night only to see the accused persons proceeding towards the farm house. (P. W. 4) was also a witness in a case against accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, (P. W. 5) and (P. W. 6) were also witnesses against accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 in an earlier case in which a charge-sheet has been filed. It was rather a strange co-incident that the same persons i. e. (P. W. 4), (P. W. 5) and (P. W. 6) were also witnesses in the present case and were the only villagers who had conveniently got up and seen the accused proceeding to the farm house at about mid-night and returning from the farm house. It was argued that these witnesses were all got up witnesses and their evidence was not worthy of belief. As regards the motive spoken of by these witnesses it was argued that the occasion to compromise the dispute had not arisen as the criminal cases had not appeared on board for trial. That in any case to avoid a conviction under section 325 it was unthinkable that the accused would commit another offence under section 302 of the ipc. As regards the finding of seizure of blood stained clothes from the person of the various convicted accused, it was contended that these clothes had not been sealed. The non sealing of these clothes had resulted in a possibility of blood being transferred to these clothes by accident or design. It was contended that in so far as the discovery of weapons said to have been made on behalf of accused Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 were concerned, no blood have been found on 3 weapons said to have been seized on behalf of accused Nos. 1, 4 and 5. It was argued that in the absence of the finding of the blood on these weapons, the link between these three weapons and the incident was not established. It was contended that this was a case based purely on circumstantial evidence and the independent links had not been proved by the prosecution. In the absence of proved independent links, no chain of circumstances could be formed and in the absence of such a chain, there could be no conviction on the strength of circumstantial evidence. It was contended that this was a case based purely on circumstantial evidence and the independent links had not been proved by the prosecution. In the absence of proved independent links, no chain of circumstances could be formed and in the absence of such a chain, there could be no conviction on the strength of circumstantial evidence. It was argued that suspicion however strong could not take the place of proof. Several authorities (to which reference would be made when we deal with the arguments) were cited in support of the propositions mentioned here-in-above. ( 7 ) ON behalf of the prosecution the Additional Public Prosecutor supported the reasoning given by the trial Court. It was argued that there was cogent evidence to support the conviction. That independent links of circumstantial evidence to show that the accused met together in the house of accused No. 7 at about 11. 30 p. m. on 17-7- 1998, went towards the farm house of the complainant at about 12. 15 p. m. and returned from the said farm house at about 2. 00 p. m. had been proved. That the non sealing of the articles was not fatal as there was no allegation of tampering with the clothes of the accused or weapons seized, that no foundation has been laid in the cross-examination to support the theory of tampering of the clothes and weapons seized. That the blood group of the deceased was found on the clothes of accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4 and human blood was found on the trouser of accused No. 5. That the knife seized at the behest of accused No. 1 was found to have blood of the blood group of the deceased. That the blood on the other weapons may have been washed away by the rain since admittedly the incident had occurred in the rainy seasons and the panchas and Investigating Officer talked about there being rain when these discoveries were made. It was contended that there was strong motive. The evidence indicated that the accused were violent persons involved in other crimes of violent nature. It was contended that there was strong motive. The evidence indicated that the accused were violent persons involved in other crimes of violent nature. It was argued that the trial Court had accepted the evidence of (P. W. 4) Abhiman, (P. W. 5) maruti Sarwade and (P. W. 6) Sitaram yamgar and the said witnesses had implicated all the accused as being the persons who went towards the farm house and returned from the said farm house. (P. W. 4) abhiman in his evidence stated that accused no. 1 was carried a sattur and accused No. 4 was carried a sword. These witnesses had their houses either near the house of accused No. 7 or in the way to the farm house and therefore, their seeing the accused was natural. The evidence of these witnesses was thus rightiy believed ad having believed all these witnesses, who all spoke about presence of all accused, the Court ought not to have acquitted any of the accused. ( 8 ) BEFORE we deal with the rival submissions, it is necessary to deal with the approach that is required to be taken in such cases where it is the admitted position that there were 2 factions in the village and the principal prosecution witnesses were admittedly on enmical terms with the accused. The approach to be taken in such cases involving enmical witnesses have been dealt with several Judgments of the Apex Court and we would like to make a reference to the observations of the Apex Court in some of these judgments. ( 9 ) IN the case of (Badri and others v. State of U. P.), A. I. R. 1975 S. C. 1985, a murder took place in the village where 2 factions were bitterly opposed to each other. The only evidence led by the prosecution was of partisan witnesses. ( 9 ) IN the case of (Badri and others v. State of U. P.), A. I. R. 1975 S. C. 1985, a murder took place in the village where 2 factions were bitterly opposed to each other. The only evidence led by the prosecution was of partisan witnesses. In paragraph-6 of the judgment the Apex Court relying upon an earlier judgment of the Apex Court in the case of (Raghubir Sing v. State of U. P.)2, A. I. R. 1971 S. C. 2156, observed as under :"the learned Sessions Judge also adopted a rather superficial approach in rejecting the testimony of Ram Dayal, Ghanshyam, Ram das and Khem Raj on the ground that Ram dayal, Ghanshyam and Ram Das belonged to the faction of Ram Sevak and were, therefore, interested persons, and khem Raj was a ploughman of Prithviraj who was a brother of Ram Sevak. The learned Sessions Judge overlooked the fact, which he himself took great care to emphasise in his judgment, that there were two factions in the village bitterly opposed to each other and their enmity had already taken a toll of twelve lives and, therefore, it would be idle to expect independent persons to come forward to give evidence and only partisan witnesses would be available, as they would even otherwise be natural and probable witnesses to the incident. It would not be right to reject their testimony out of hand merely on the ground that they belonged to one faction or another. This Court pointed out in raghubir Singh v. State of U. P. , A. I. R. 1971 s. C. 2156 : 1971 Cri. L. J. 1468, that "in this connection the general reluctance of an average villager to appear, as a witness and get himself involved in cases of rival village factions when sprits on both sides are running high has to be borne in mind". The learned Sessions Judge was, therefore, plainly and indubitably in error in rejecting the evidence of Ram Dayal, Ghanshyam, ram Das and Khem Raj without even crying to assess it on its own merits. " in the case of (State of U. P. v. Ram swarup),a. l. R. 1988 S. C. 1028, a murder took place in a village where the people were divided on caste basis. " in the case of (State of U. P. v. Ram swarup),a. l. R. 1988 S. C. 1028, a murder took place in a village where the people were divided on caste basis. The Apex Court held that in such a situation it was wrong to ignore the testimony of such witnesses by stating that either they are partisan witnesses or close relatives of the deceased. That such evidence should however, be subjected to careful scrutiny and accepted with caution. The observation of the Apex court in paragraph 10 of the said judgment was in the following terms. The High Court has simply ignored the testimony of eye-witnesses by stating that they are either partisan witnesses or close relatives of the deceased. There is no rule of law to the effect that the evidence of partisan witnesses cannot be accepted. The fact that the witnesses are associated with the faction opposed to that of the accused by itself does not render their evidence false. Partisanship by itself is no ground for discarding sworn testimony. Interested evidence is not necessarily false evidence. In a small village like the one under consideration where people are divided on caste basis, the prosecution may not be able to get any neutral witness. Even if there is any such neutral witness he will be reluctant to come forward to give testimony to support one or the other side. Therefore, merely because the eye-witnesses are associated with one faction or the other, their evidence should not be discarded. It should, no doubt, be subjected to careful scrutiny and accepted with caution. " in the case of (Rama Shish Rai v. Jagdish Sing), A. I. R. 2004 S. C. W. 6713, the Apex Court was dealing with a case where several eye-witnesses had been held to be enmical to the accused by the High court. On this footing the High Court had discarded the eye-witnesses accounts. The apex Court in paragraph-7 of the judgment observed as under. "we are clearly of the view that the findings of the High Court were erroneous, resulting in grave miscarriage of justice. The eye-witnesses p. Ws. 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 and 10 consistently supported the case of the prosecution throughout. They were subjected to lengthy cross-examination but nothing could be elicited from their mouth so as to discard the creditworthiness of their statements. The eye-witnesses p. Ws. 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 and 10 consistently supported the case of the prosecution throughout. They were subjected to lengthy cross-examination but nothing could be elicited from their mouth so as to discard the creditworthiness of their statements. The ocular evidence of the eye-witnesses were corroborated in material particulars with the medical material particulars with the medical evidence. In out view, therefore, the acquittal recorded by the High Court on the aforesaid reasoning is perverse. The High court discarded the eye-witness account, branded them as inimical witnesses. This is not the requirement of law. The requirement of law is that the testimony of inimical witnesses has to be considered with caution. If otherwise the witnesses are true and reliable their testimony cannot be thrown out on the testimony cannot be thrown out on the threshold by branding them as inimical witnesses. By now, it is well settled principle of law that enmity is a double edged sword. It can be a ground for false implication. It also can be a ground for assault. Therefore, a duty is case upon the court to examine the testimony of inimical witnesses with due caution and diligence. In the present case the High Court has rejected the otherwise creditworthy testimony of eye-witness account merely on the ground that there was enmity between the prosecution party and the accused party. " ( 10 ) IN the present case it is clear from the evidence that there were 2 factions in the village, one led by Police Patil and other led by Sarpanch. The Sarpanch and almost all the accused were accused in one or the other cases filed against them in which the members of the faction led by the Police Patil were witnesses. The evidence further indicated that there were cases filed against the prosecution witnesses in the present case in which the complaint had been filed by accused No. 2 or accused No. 3 in the present case. The star witnesses of the prosecution in the present case were (P. W. 4) abhiman, P. W. 5 Maruti and P. W. 6 sitaram. (P. W. 4) Abhiman was an accused in a complaint filed by accused No. 3 concerning an incident which occured in 1996. He readily admitted the said fact. The star witnesses of the prosecution in the present case were (P. W. 4) abhiman, P. W. 5 Maruti and P. W. 6 sitaram. (P. W. 4) Abhiman was an accused in a complaint filed by accused No. 3 concerning an incident which occured in 1996. He readily admitted the said fact. (P. W. 5) maruti alongwith 4 of his family members were accused in a case filed against them by accused No. 2. He admitted this fact in his cross-examination. (P. W. 6) Sitaram was an accused in a criminal case filed against him by accused No. 3. This was also a fact admitted by him. It is thus clear that the star prosecution witnesses were inimical to the accused persons. Be that as it may, applying the ratio laid down by the Apex court in the cases cited aforesaid it is clear that the evidence of these inimical witnesses cannot be discarded merely because they are inimical but must be scrutinised with care and caution. We have accordingly, proceeded to do so. ( 11 ) (P. W. 5) Maruti was a person whose house was situated 10 feet away from the house of accused No. 7. On 17-7-1998 at about 11. 30 to 11. 45 p. m. he was carrying fodder to his cattle shed which was adjoining the house of accused No. 7. He saw all the accused talking with each other. He served the fodder to the cattle and saw towards the flour mill, he saw 5 to 6 persons in the light of electricity from the bulb on the pole situated near the flour mill, he saw the accused persons and also saw accused no. 5 come there. He saw accused No. 5 telling the other accused that the 2 deceased bharat and Krishna were sleeping in the farm house. Then all the accused got up and went inside the house of accused No. 7. He then went towards his house and retired for the night. He claimed that early in the next morning he learnt that Bharat and krishna had been murdered. He went to the farm house of the complainant and saw the dead bodies. He did not disclose the incident of seeing the accused. After 2 to 3 days there was a proclamation by beat of drums seeking information regarding the murder of the 2 brothers to the Dy. He went to the farm house of the complainant and saw the dead bodies. He did not disclose the incident of seeing the accused. After 2 to 3 days there was a proclamation by beat of drums seeking information regarding the murder of the 2 brothers to the Dy. S. P. and to the effect that if such information was given, the names of the informant would be kept secret. Accordingly he went to the office of Dy S. P. Tulzapur and his statement was recorded. In the short crossexamination of this witness it was brought on record that the police patil Haridas was his cousin brother and 2 of his brothers doulat and Pratap were cited as witnesses in the present case. All other suggestions were denied by this witness. It was not suggested to this witness that his house was not 10 feet away from the house of accused no. 7. There is no contradiction or omission in the evidence of this witness. We find of the deceased and (P. W. 7) Laxman the brother of the deceased. The sum and substance of the evidence of these witnesses as regards motive is that accused No. 7 had approached Krishna with a view to get him to agree to an amicable settlement of their differences. Krishna had refused to agree to an amicable settlement and this had infuriated Sarpanch Prabhakar to plan and lead this attack against Krishna and his brother. Having accepted the evidence of (P. W. 4) Abhiman, (P. W. 5) Maruti and (P. W. 6) Sitaram, we find that the story of the prosecution, relating to the motive, as deposed to by these 2 witnesses is also acceptable. In addition we have same story given by (P. W. 3) Bhagwan and (P. W. 7) laxman, (P. W. 7) Laxman had been approached by accused No. 7 with a view to make him persuade his brother to agree to a settlement. There is nothing in the cross- examination of (P. W. 7) which renders him un-creditworthy and his version that he indeed tried to persuade Maruti but failed, corroborates the testimonies of (P. W. 4), (P. W. 5) and (P. W. 6 ). It was sought to be argued that there was no occasion for compromise since the criminal cases in question had not come on the board for trial. We find no substance in this argument. It was sought to be argued that there was no occasion for compromise since the criminal cases in question had not come on the board for trial. We find no substance in this argument. The cases involved compoundable offences. The evidence pertained not only to settlement of the criminal cases but to the settlement of the disputes between the parties. There is material on record to show that a summons witness had been issued to Maruti. It was argued that only to wriggle out a case under section 325, the accused persons would not jump from a frying pan in to the fire by committing a double murder and getting involved in a case under section 302 of I. P. C. The argument was that the motive was not in proportion to the crime committed. In our view, it is not necessary that the motive should be in any way proportionate to the crime ultimately committed. In this regard, in the case of (Ranganayaki v. The state by Inspector of Police)5, A. I. R. 2004 s. C. W. 6613, the Apex Court while dealing with the question of proportionality of motive, observed in paragraph 10 as under :-"motive for doing a criminal act is generally a difficult area for prosecution. One cannot normally see into the mind of another. Motive is the emotion which impels a man to do a particular act. Such impelling cause need not necessarily be proportionally grave to do grave crimes. Many a murder have been committed without any known or prominent motive. It is quite possible that the aforesaid impelling factor would remain undiscoverable. Lord Chief Justice champbell struck a note of caution in (Red v. Palmer), shorthand report at 308 May, 1856 thus; "but if there be any motive which can be assigned. I am bound to tell you that the adequacy of that motive is of little im- portance. We know, from experience of criminal courts that atrocious crimes of this sort have been committed from very slight motives; not merely from malice and revenge, but to gain a small pecuniary advantage, and to drive off for a time pressing difficulties". Though, it is, a sound presumption that every criminal act is done with a motive, it is unsound to suggest that no such criminal act can be presumed unless motive is proved. After all, motive is a psychological phenomenon. Though, it is, a sound presumption that every criminal act is done with a motive, it is unsound to suggest that no such criminal act can be presumed unless motive is proved. After all, motive is a psychological phenomenon. Mere fact that prosecution failed to translate that mental disposition of the accused into evidence does not mean that no such mental condition existed in the mind of the assailants. In (Atleyv. State of U. P.), A. I. R. 1955 S. C. 807, it was held "that is true, and where there is clear proof of motive for the crime, that lends additional support to the finding of the Court that the accused was guilty, but absence of clear proof of motive does not necessarily lead to the contrary conclusion". In some cases it may be difficult to establish motive through direct evidence, while in some other cases inferences from circumstances may help in discerning the mental propensity of the person concerned. There may also be cases in which it is not possible to disinter the mental transaction of the accused which would have impelled him to act. No proof can be expected in all cases as to how the mind of the accused worked in a particular situation. Sometimes it may appear that the motive established is a weak one. That by itself is insufficient to lead to an inference adverse to the prosecution. Absence of motive, even if it is accepted, does not come to aid of the accused. These principles have to be tested on the background of factual scenario. "we therefore, must conclude that the lack of adequacy, of motive cannot be an argument with any force. The motive for committing the crime must therefore, held to have been established and with this, one more link had been proved by the prosecution against the accused. ( 15 ) THAT bring us to the question of discovery of the blood stained weapons at the behest of the accused. Though there is a reference of all the weapons being blood stained in the relevant Panchanamas, blood of 'b' group, being the blood group of the deceased was detected only on the dagger seized on the behest of accused No. 2. No blood was found on the weapons said to have been discovered on behest of accused nos. 1, 4 and 5. No blood was found on the weapons said to have been discovered on behest of accused nos. 1, 4 and 5. The trial Court proceeded on the footing that since it was a rainy season it was possible that the blood on the weapons said to have been discovered at the behest of accused Nos. 1, 4 6s 5 may have been washed away. This evidence however, is clearly incriminating in so far as accused No. 2 is concerned. Evidence of (P. W. 6) Sitaram suggests that the accused were not carrying any weapons with them when they returned to the village. We have at the back of our mind a possibility that some of the accused could have cleaned these weapons with water as they were all buried in the vicinity of a well and could have returned to the village without weapons. However, to be on the safe side, we would like to discard this evidence as against accused Nos. 1, 4 and 5. This evidence is however, established and incriminates accused No. 2 Sadashiv. We further find that even accepting this evidence, limited to the case of Sadashiv, the same lends support to the truth of the testimonies given by (P. W. 4), (P. W. 5) and (P. W. 6), already dealt with us earlier. It was further argued that the weapon seized at the behest of accused No. 2 was not sealed. A similar argument relating to the non sealing of the clothes was also raised and we shall deal wit these arguments while we deal with the question of non-sealing and effect of non sealing of the clothes and weapons hereinafter. ( 16 ) AS regards the finding of blood stained clothes of accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 we find from the record that the clothes of accused Nos. 1, 4 and 5 were stained with blood of blood group 'b' which was also the blood on the clothes of the deceased and on the blood stained earth found on the spot. Earlier in this judgment we have outlined the finding of the C. A. regarding the blood stains and their dimensions on each garments seized from the accused. 1, 4 and 5 were stained with blood of blood group 'b' which was also the blood on the clothes of the deceased and on the blood stained earth found on the spot. Earlier in this judgment we have outlined the finding of the C. A. regarding the blood stains and their dimensions on each garments seized from the accused. In so far as accused No. 5 is concerned, the blood group on his trouser was found to be human but the grouping could not be determined by the C. A. The argument made on behest of the defence was that none of these articles were shown to have been sealed by the police and therefore, there was possibility of blood stained accidentally getting on to the clothes seized from the accused. It was further argued that there was also a possibility that the blood stains could have been deliberately put on the clothes of the accused as well as on the knife seized on behest of accused No. 2 Sadashiv. It was further argued that the prosecution had unfairly not brought on record the blood group of the accused persons though the record indicated that the blood of all the accused had been taken and sent to the C. A. The reports of the C. A. in this regard had been suppressed and therefore, the possibility of the blood on the clothes of the accused and on the weapon discovered on behest of accused No. 2 being that of the accused themselves could not be ruled out. ( 17 ) IT is the admitted position in the present case that the clothes taken from the body of the deceased, the blood stained earth taken from the scene of the offence, the clothes taken from the body of the accused or the weapons seized at the behest of the accused were not sealed. We cannot over emphasise the need to seal every article which is to be subjected to either further identification on further scientific analysis. Sealing of these articles at the earliest possible opportunity after they are found, produced of discovered eliminates the possibility of accidental loss of evidence, the accidental introduction of evidence or the tampering of evidence with design. The immediate sealing of such articles increases the credibility and acceptability of such evidence in Court. Sealing of these articles at the earliest possible opportunity after they are found, produced of discovered eliminates the possibility of accidental loss of evidence, the accidental introduction of evidence or the tampering of evidence with design. The immediate sealing of such articles increases the credibility and acceptability of such evidence in Court. It makes the task of the administration of justice simpler as it is easier for the Court to accept tamper proof evidence as more reliable. The need to seal the articles which have been seized has been the subject-matter of several judgments and we would like to make a reference to a few. In the case of (Amarjit Singhv. State of Punjab), 1993 Supp (3) S. C. C. 217, decided on 25-8-1993, the Apex Court observed as under: 7)"the entire prosecution case, thus, is clouded with number of infirmities which compel this Court not to accept such an unworthy evidence. These infirmities have been brushed aside by the Designated Court by observing that since the model number of the revolver was noted down, the nonsealing of the revolver or the handing over of the same to some other Police Official or a private person, who has not been examinated are of no consequence. We are unable to agree and subscribe to this view in a case of this nature. The non sealing of the revolver at the spot is a serious infirmity because the possibility of tampering with the weapon cannot be ruled out. The report of P. W. 4 that the weapon is capable of being fired is insignificant since it cannot be said with certainty as to what was the condition of the weapon at the time of the recovery, apart from the evidence of P. W. 4 that he did not test fire the revolver. "the aforesaid Judgment of the Apex court was followed by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of (D. D. Suvamav. State of Maharashtra), 1994 (3) Cri. L. J. 3602. That was a case of a gruesome double murder. In the said case the Division bench disbelieved the 3 eye witnesses examined by the prosecution and concluded that the Investigating Officer in the said case had falsely introduced one of the three eyewitnesses i. e. Paulose kakade. State of Maharashtra), 1994 (3) Cri. L. J. 3602. That was a case of a gruesome double murder. In the said case the Division bench disbelieved the 3 eye witnesses examined by the prosecution and concluded that the Investigating Officer in the said case had falsely introduced one of the three eyewitnesses i. e. Paulose kakade. After disbelieving the ocular account, in para 23 the division Bench dealt with the circumstantial evidence which was two fold in nature i. e. recovery of blood stained clothes of the accused at the time of arrest and the recovery of blood stained weapons at the beheast of some of the accused. From the record of that case the Division Bench found that the blood stained clothes and the weapons had not been sealed. The Division Bench relying upon a Division Bench judgment of rajasthan High Court in the case of (State v. Motto), reported in A. I. R. 1955 Raj. 82, and the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Amarjeet Singh (supra), for the several reasons which are mentioned in the judgment, concluded that the evidence pertaining to production and recovery was not clinching enough to fix the guilt of the appellant. The reasons given by the Court for holding as aforesaid was that (a) there was no evidence on record to show where the clothes which were seized were lying between 25-3-1991 i. e. the date of seizure till 9-4-1991 the date when they were sent to the C. A. ; (b) That there was no evidence to indicate the seals of the packets in which the clothes were kept were intact through out. (c) That the recovery memos pertaining to the recovery of weapons did not contain any reference to sealing and the police officer who had effected the recovery memos could give no explanation about this absence to a reference to the sealing of the weapons. (d) that at the time of recording the recovery memo, the accused who produced the weapons were handcuffed and therefore, it would not be stated beyond reasonable doubt that the recovery was voluntary and not result of duress or threat by police authorities. The aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench was followed by this court in the case of (State of Maharashtra v. Prabhu Bade), 1995 Cri. L. J. 1432. The aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench was followed by this court in the case of (State of Maharashtra v. Prabhu Bade), 1995 Cri. L. J. 1432. In this case, decided by a Division Bench of this Court, it was argued that the finding of blood on the tikav which was the weapon used in the murder and the blood stained clothes from the person of the accused would not be much avail for the prosecution and there was no evidence on record to show that from the time the said article was recovered, till the time they went to the c. A. , the gap being more than 8 days, they were kept through out in a sealed condition. After placing reliance on the judgments in the case of Amarjeet Singh referred supra as also on the judgment reported in A. I. R. 1955 Raj. 82, which was followed by the division Bench of this Court in the case of d. D. Suvama v. State of Maharashtra (supra) reported in 1994 Cri. L. J. 3602 as also upon an unreported judgment of the Division Bench of this court in Criminal Appeal Nos. 603, 608 and 624 of 1993 connected with Confirmation Case No. 3/93, as regards the effects of non sealing of the weapons and the clothes of the accused, it was observed as under : "the necessity of sealing has also been emphasised by their lordships of the Apex Court in the decision reported in 1993 (4) Cur Cri. R-486 (Amarjit Singhv. Stateof Punjab ). Mr. Lambay, the learned Additional Public prosecutor fairly conceded that there is no evidence on record to show that the aforesaid articles were kept throughout in a sealed condition ie. right from the time of recovery till being sent to the Chemical Analyst. For the aforesaid reasons, the evidence of recoveries has to be excluded by us in determining whether the appellant is guilty. We propose placing no reliance upon it. " in the case of (Asharaf Hussain Shah v. State of Maharashtra), 1996 Cri. L. J. 3147, a Division Bench of this Court was once again confronted with the situation where the blood stained clothes of the accused and the knife produced at the behest were not proved to be sealed. We propose placing no reliance upon it. " in the case of (Asharaf Hussain Shah v. State of Maharashtra), 1996 Cri. L. J. 3147, a Division Bench of this Court was once again confronted with the situation where the blood stained clothes of the accused and the knife produced at the behest were not proved to be sealed. The Division bench relying upon the earlier Judgment in the case of D. D. Suvama (supra) held in paragraph-8 as under -"first of all we would like to observe that the learned trial Judge was perfectly justified in rejecting the evidence of recovery of blood stained clothes and knife at the pointing out of the appellant, primarily on the ground that there was no evidence to indicate that after seizure these articles were sealed. A division Bench of this Court to which one of us (Vishnu Sahai, J) was a party in the case of (Deoraj Deju Suvama v. State of maharashtra), reported in 1994 (4) bom. C. R. 85:1994 Cri. L. J. 3602, after considering a large number of authorities has held that not only should the prosecution adduce evidence that after seizure the articles were sealed but should also lead link evidence to the effect that till being sent to the Chemical Analyst they were kept throughout in a sealed condition. This is done to eliminate the suspicion that blood might not have been put on the articles subsequent to the recovery and prior to being sent to the Chemical Analyst. " ( 18 ) IN our view, though in the aforesaid cases the Court felt it imperative to exclude the evidence of recoveries, the Division benches did not lay down any mathematical formula that lack of sealing must automatically result in discarding the entire evidence relating to the articles which were seized but not sealed. ( 19 ) WE are fortified in this view by a subsequent Division Bench judgment of this court in the case of (Santosh Bhatwandin bachharaj v. State of Maharashtra), reported in 2004 (1) Bom. C. R. (Cri.) (N. B.)453 : 2003 All. M. R. (Cri.) 98. ( 19 ) WE are fortified in this view by a subsequent Division Bench judgment of this court in the case of (Santosh Bhatwandin bachharaj v. State of Maharashtra), reported in 2004 (1) Bom. C. R. (Cri.) (N. B.)453 : 2003 All. M. R. (Cri.) 98. While dealing with the question of effect of the non sealing of the blood stained clothes and a knife, after referring to one of the aforesaid Division Bench judgment in the case of Ashraf H. Shah (supra) in paragraph-17 observed as follows :"on the question of sealing, learned Advocate for the appellant has relied upon Asharaf hussain Shah v. State of Maharashtra (cited supra) which speaks of the sealing of the blood stained clothes and knife. Sealing does assume importance in many cases but only on account of the fact that the articles were not sealed, it does not necessarily follow that the articles have been tampered with or interfered. The sealing is done to eliminate suspicion that blood might have been put on the article subsequent to the recovery and prior to it being sent to Chemical Analyser. In the case before us, the prosecution witnesses P. W. 1 and P. W. 2 have categorically stated that the appellant had inflicted two blows on the deceased with gupti and both of them have identified the gupti in question. It is not only natural but obvious that when two blows are given with gupti, human blood is bound to be there. The Panchnama of recovery (Exh. 162) shows that there were blood stains on the blade of Gupti. Though I. O. and pancha do not speak of sealing, yet Chemical Analyser received the same under sealed cover. Chemical Analyser's report shows human blood on blade of Gupti. Hence, the question of any tampering with the Gupti so as to fabricate blood on the same, in the circumstances, does not arise. Therefore, we have no reason whatsoever to discard the recovery of Gupti and on the Gupti human blood stains were found though the blood group was inconclusive. The presence of human blood on the weapon of offence namely gupti which has been identified by p. W. 1 and P. W. 2 is an incrimination circumstance against the appellant. Therefore, we have no reason whatsoever to discard the recovery of Gupti and on the Gupti human blood stains were found though the blood group was inconclusive. The presence of human blood on the weapon of offence namely gupti which has been identified by p. W. 1 and P. W. 2 is an incrimination circumstance against the appellant. "further in para 18 the Division Bench dealt with the contention of the prosecution that the defence had not led any foundation for the argument that there was tampering with the shirt and that a mere possibility, in the air, was not sufficient unless the defence probablised the possibility of such tampering. While dealing with this argument, in para 18 the Division Bench observed as under :"the attachment panchnama shows blood stains on the shirt. The Investigation Officer was not cross-examined at all in this respect and it was not the case of the appellant that the blood was subsequently sprinkled on his shirt. There has to be some foundation for the argument that there was tampering with the shirt and a mere possibility in air is not sufficient but the defence has to probabilise the possibility and then only the same can be accepted. There was absolutely no cross-examination of the Investigating Officer on this aspect. The appellant was arrested on 20-3-1995 at 11. 45 p. m. and shirt in question was attached under Panchanama (Exh. 158) within minutes of arrest. On this shirt there were blood stains on either side of front portion. Thus the presence of human blood on the shirt of the appellant, which was attached from his person within minutes of his arrest, is strong incriminating evidence showing involvement of the appellant in the crime. In the facts and circumstances of the case, non sealing of this article is not sufficient to disbelieve the said recovery of shirt on which blood stains of human origin were found. It may be mentioned here that the Chemical analyser's Report shows that the articles were in fact received by him duly sealed. " ( 20 ) IN our view, there can be cases where the evidence relating to recovery or discovery can be accepted even though the articles in question had not been sealed, though ideally they ought to have been. " ( 20 ) IN our view, there can be cases where the evidence relating to recovery or discovery can be accepted even though the articles in question had not been sealed, though ideally they ought to have been. The Apex court in Amarjeetsingh (supra) had held that the non sealing of the weapon in that case was a serious infirmity because of possibility of tampering of the weapon could not be ruled out. It is yet open for the Court to go into the question as to whether there could have been tampering and if this possibility of tampering is improbable in the facts of the case then, such evidence pertaining to recovery or discovery if otherwise found reliable can be accepted. While looking into the question as to whether there could have been accidental introduction of evidence or deliberate tampering, some of the questions which have to be given weightage can be outlined as under : (a) whether defence has led any foundation by suggestion to the concerned witnesses that the evidence was accidentally introduced or deliberately introduced with a design. Asking of such question to the concerned witnesses would give them an opportunity of giving an explanation. (b) The possibility of material being available with the investigating officer to effect such tampering. For example if a phial of blood of the deceased had been taken by the Investigating Officer and was available in an unsealed condition with him, then the finding of blood of the same blood group on non sealed articles lying in the police station may not be of much significance. (c) The intrinsic nature of the evidence found e. g. the number of blood stains which are found on a garment, the dimensions of such blood stains, the places on the garments where such blood stains were found. In this regard even if there are blood stained clothes of the deceased lying in the Police Station, if there is a time lap which would permit such clothes to dry, the possibility of blood being transferred by accident to the clothes of the accused clothes of the accused could be ruled out. In this regard even if there are blood stained clothes of the deceased lying in the Police Station, if there is a time lap which would permit such clothes to dry, the possibility of blood being transferred by accident to the clothes of the accused clothes of the accused could be ruled out. Then again tampering with the clothes of the accused by transferring the blood stains from the clothes of the deceased would be more difficult than transferring the blood from the said clothes on to an article like a knife by wiping the same by wetting the clothes of the deceased. (d) Whether there are other external indications on record pointing towards the deliberate introduction of false evidence concerning other aspects of the prosecution case. (e) The duration for which such articles were lying in un-sealed condition in the police station. ( 21 ) IN the present case we are inclined to accept the evidence pertaining to the recovery of blood stained clothes from the person of the accused as well as the blood stained dagger discovered at the behest of accused No. 2, notwithstanding the fact that the blood stained clothes of the deceased were lying in the Police Station in an unsealed condition from 18-7-1998. We find from the record that the clothes of the accused Nos. 1 and 2 were seized in the evening of 18-7-1998. It was argued by the advocate for the accused that these clothes were put alongwith the clothes of the deceased and water was pored on them. We find no foundation on record for this argument. No question relating to the accidental transfer of blood stains or transfer of blood stains by any such design were put to the Investigating Officer or to the concerned Ponchos. The arguments has thus no basis or foundation on the record. We note that in the present case the clothes of accused Nos. 1 and 2 were seized on the evening of 18-7-1998. By this time the blood on the clothes of the deceased would have dried and there was very little possibility of accidental transfer of blood into the clothes of these accused. The clothes of accused no. 4 were seized on his arrest on 19-7- 1998 and the clothes of accused No. 5 were seized on his arrest on 20-7-1998. By this time the blood on the clothes of the deceased would have dried and there was very little possibility of accidental transfer of blood into the clothes of these accused. The clothes of accused no. 4 were seized on his arrest on 19-7- 1998 and the clothes of accused No. 5 were seized on his arrest on 20-7-1998. For the same reason, the possibility of accidental transfer of blood on the clothes of accused nos. 4 and 5 can also be ruled out. No questions have been put to the Investigating officer or concerned panchas relating to any deliberately tampering of the clothes seized on the person of accused Nos. 4 and 5. More importantly, it is seen that all these clothes contained drops of blood at different places ranging from 1 c. m. to 2 c. m. The poring of water by mixing of the clothes, in our view, would not produce such pattern or such dimensions. It is true that C. A. could not determine the group of the blood found on the trouser of accused No. 5. The said trou- ser however, was found to contain human blood. This circumstance, in our view, cannot be discarded merely because the blood group could not be determined by the C. A. , particularly bearing in mind the fact that accused No. 5 gives no explanation in his 313 statement regarding the finding of human blood. Similarly other accused persons also could not give any explanation regarding the blood of 'b' group found on their clothes. All the accused restricted themselves to stating that finding of C. A. was false. In the circumstances, we accept the evidence relating to the finding of blood on the clothes of accused Nos. 1,2,4 and 5 as well as the evidence relating to the finding of blood of 'b' group on the knife seized at the behest of accused No. 2 Sadashiv and hold that these are additional links in the chain of circumstances pointing towards the guild of the accused. ( 22 ) THE learned Advocate for the defence relied upon several authorities to canvass two general propositions. The first proposition which he canvassed was that all the aforesaid circumstances put together would only lead to suspicion against the accused and that suspicion could not take the place of proof. ( 22 ) THE learned Advocate for the defence relied upon several authorities to canvass two general propositions. The first proposition which he canvassed was that all the aforesaid circumstances put together would only lead to suspicion against the accused and that suspicion could not take the place of proof. The authorities cited by him are (i) (Padala Veera Reddy v. State of Andhra pradesh), A. I. R. 1990 S. C. 79 (ii) (A. I. R. 1990 S. C. 79), (iii) (Swinder Singh v. State of Punjab), A. I. R. 1992 S. C. 669 (iv) (A. I. R. 2002 S. C. 3206)18. The facts of all those cases were different and we have no hesitation in accepting the proposition canvassed by the Advocate for the accused. The second proposition related to the manner of appreciation of circumstantial evidence. The authorities cited were (1) (State of Haryana v. Ved Prakash), A. I. R. 1994 S. C. 468, (2 ). (Hindustan Lever Employees' Union, Petitioner v. Hindustan Lever Limited), A. I. R. 1995 Cri. L. J. 470. (3) (Kishore Chandv. State of Himachal Pradesh]', A. I. R. 1990 S. C. 2140. (4) (Badam Singh v. State of Madhya pradesh), A. I. R. 2004 S. C. 26, and (A. I. R. 2004 S. C. W. 5068 ). The legal position relating to case involving circumstantial evidence is well settled. The prosecution has to prove every link and establish a chain of circumstances from each individually proved link, leading to the unmistakable conclusion of the guilt of the accused. The prosecution case must not be one which can be explained by any other hypothesis save and except the guilt of the accused. These are the propositions laid down in the aforesaid cases which are acceptable and hence we find no reason to deal with the aforesaid judgments. ( 23 ) THE learned Prosecutor argued that the non explanation of finding of blood on their clothes by accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 was itself a link in the chain of circumstances. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of (State of maharashtra v. Damu), 2000 (Supp.) bom. C. R. (S. C.)616 : 2000 (6) S. C. C. 269. In that case the police has recovered a pitcher from the house of the accused which was found to be stained with blood. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of (State of maharashtra v. Damu), 2000 (Supp.) bom. C. R. (S. C.)616 : 2000 (6) S. C. C. 269. In that case the police has recovered a pitcher from the house of the accused which was found to be stained with blood. The accused in his statement under section 313 did not explain how the blood got on to the pitcher and he restricted himself to denying the seizure of the pitcher. It was held that such a denial would be sufficient to provide the missing link in the chain of circumstances. In the aforesaid circumstances , the Apex Court in paragraph 33 observed as under :"when A-2 Guruji was arrested and interrogated, he stated to p. W. 44, the Investigating Officer regarding a "kalash" (pitcher) which was recovered by P. W. 44, the Investigating Officer from the house of A-2 Guruji. What is significant about the recovery is that when chemical test was made on the pitcher, blood was found sticking on the outer side of the vessel. Of course, the chemical analyst could not determine the origin of the blood as it was disintegrated by that time. But the learned Judges of the high Court did not attach any value to the circumstance on that sole reason. At the first blush, the approach of the High Court may appear to be sound. But when we considered the answer which A-2 Guruji had given to the questions put to him under section 313 of the Code regarding the said circumstance, he simply denied even the recovery of the "kalash" as stated by P. W. 44, the investigating officer. When we know that there was blood on the pitcher it is for a-2 Guruji to explain how it was there. But when he denied even the seizure of the pitcher, such a denial in this context, is not inconsequential. In another case, a similar denial was treated by this Court as sufficient to provide a "missing link" to the chain of circumstances (State of Maharashtra v. Suresh), 2000 (5) Bom. C. R. (S. C.)736 : 2000 (1) S. C. C. 471. In the present case also we note that the manner in which blood came to their clothes was a matter within the special knowledge of the accused and they ought to have given some explanation. C. R. (S. C.)736 : 2000 (1) S. C. C. 471. In the present case also we note that the manner in which blood came to their clothes was a matter within the special knowledge of the accused and they ought to have given some explanation. We have also noted that no injuries were found on the body of the accused persons. " ( 24 ) TAKING an over all view, we find that no fault can be found with the conviction by the trial Court in so far as accused Nos. 1, 2, 4 and 5 are concerned. In so far as other accused are concerned, the trial Court acquitted accused Nos. 3, 6, 7 and 8 because some of the links in the chain of circumstances against these accused were missing. The link pertaining to finding of blood stained clothes was missing against these accused. Similarly the link pertaining to seizure of blood stained weapons were also missing against these accused. No doubt, all these accused were involved in an omnibus fashion through the evidence of (P. W. 4), (P. W. 5) and (P. W. 6 ). Yet we cannot lose sight of the fact that these witnesses were inimical witnesses and if the trial Court thought it fit to read their evidence with caution and in the exercise of such caution, to scan the other evidence, we cannot say that this approach is perverse. We also cannot lose sight of the fact that we are in an appeal against acquittal and that we should not overturn a finding unless we find that the same is perverse. ( 25 ) IN the net result, all the aforesaid appeals are dismissed. All the accused in criminal Appeal No. 294/99 will surrender by 31st October, 2005 to undergo their sentence. Their bail bonds stand extended till 31st October, 2005 and will lapse on that date. Appeal dismissed.