ARUNA SURESH, J. ( 1 ) APPELLANT Bhikhwa @ Parkash has assailed the order of conviction dated 26. 2. 1997 and order on sentence dated 27. 2. 1997 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi, whereby he was convicted under section 302 IPC and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/ -. In default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one month. ( 2 ) PROSECUTION filed charge sheet against the present appellant Bhikhwa @ Parkash with the allegation that complainant Ram Parkash @ Bandal, pws Kapil and Biltu and the present appellant belonged to Village madhopur Jakholi, P. S. Bahra, Distt. Darbhanga, Bihar. PW Kapil was employed in Hotel Mughal Mahal, Rajindra Place, New Delhi. Complainant ram Parkash @ Bandal was friendly with deceased Smt. Krishna who was doing domestic work in East Patel Nagar and they all used to sleep in the desu Park, East Patel Nagar. On 10. 3. 1993 they were sleeping in the park when at about 4. 00 A. M. , complainant Ram Parkash, Pws Biltu and Kapil heard noise of floundering ('chhatpatahat') of Krishna and they hurriedly got up. They saw appellant Bhikhwa @ Parkash had gagged Krishna's mouth with his left hand and was hitting on the body of Krishna with a brick in his right hand. On seeing them getting up Bhikhwa ran away. Bhikhwa had an evil eye on Krishna for which she had lodged a complaint with the police and bhikhwa was detained by the police on the intervening night of 2nd/3rd march,1993. Krishna had informed the complainant, on the day of Holi, about, the said incident and also that Bhikhwa had threatened her. FIR No. 129/93 under Section 308 IPC was registered against the appellant. ( 3 ) INJURED Krishna was removed to Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital. Lady Dr. Rani Jain CPW-6) found Krishna bleeding from her nose, ear and' mouth. She was referred to surgical emergency ward for treatment. Smt,krishna was declared unfit for making statement. She died in the hospital on the same date i. e, 10. 3. 1993 at about 8. 15 A. M. Accordingly, the offence under Section 308 was converted into one under Section 302 IPC. Appellant was arrested in a case under Section 25 of the Arms Act on 17. 3. Smt,krishna was declared unfit for making statement. She died in the hospital on the same date i. e, 10. 3. 1993 at about 8. 15 A. M. Accordingly, the offence under Section 308 was converted into one under Section 302 IPC. Appellant was arrested in a case under Section 25 of the Arms Act on 17. 3. 1995 wherein he made a disclosure statement on the basis of which he was formally arrested in this case. ( 4 ) THE learned Addl. Sessions Judge framed the following charge under section 302 IPC against the appellant:- "i, R. S. Khanna, Addl. Sessions Judge, Delhi, do hereby charge you bhikhwa @ Ram Parkash @ Parkash son of Shri Manchit Dass as follows: that you on 10. 3. 93 at about 4 AM in DESU Park, East Patel Nagar, within the jurisdiction of PS Patel Nagar did commit the murder of Smt. Krishna by causing such bodily injuries on her person with a brick knowing it to be likely to cause her death and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and within the cognizance of this court. And I hereby direct that you be tried by this court on the above charge. ASJ, Delhi 11. 1. 96" Appellant denied the charge and claimed trial. ( 5 ) TO prove the guilt of the appellant, prosecution in all examined 18 witnesses. PW-2 Kapil, PW-3 Ram Parkash complainant and PW-4 Biltu are the. eye witnesses to the incident. PW-6 Dr. Rani Jain, CMO, Dr. R. M. L. Hospital had medically examined Krishna on 10. 3. 1993 at about 6. 30 A. M. PW-13, Dr. T. L. Ramani had conducted postmortem on the body of the deceased Krishna on 11. 3. 1993. PW-12 ASI Gautam is the I. O. of the case. All the remaining witnesses are police officials who joined the investigation of the case at one stage or the other and their testimony is formal in nature. ( 6 ) DEFENCE of the appellant is that he has been falsely implicated in this case since he and the Pws namely Biltu, Kapil and Ram Parkash belong to the same village. The three Pws were inimical towards him because of some land dispute in the village and they falsely implicated him in this case. ( 6 ) DEFENCE of the appellant is that he has been falsely implicated in this case since he and the Pws namely Biltu, Kapil and Ram Parkash belong to the same village. The three Pws were inimical towards him because of some land dispute in the village and they falsely implicated him in this case. Learned Amicus Curiae for the appellant has highlighted various discrepancies in the statements of prosecution witnesses Ram Parkash, biltu and Kapil and also the fact that their statements do not find any corroboration from the medical evidence as adduced on the record by the prosecution. It is also pointed out that there is delay of about four hours in lodging FIR of this case. The conduct of PW Kapil makes his presence doubtful at the spot at the time of alleged incident. According to him all the three witnesses have given a parrot like statement. ( 7 ) LEARNED Amicus Curiae for the appellant has pointed out that there is contradiction regarding the place of alleged incident; whether they were sleeping in the DESU Park or some other park. Even the police witnesses have given unreliable statements. There are lacunae in the prosecution evidence. The vehicle in which the deceased Krishna was removed to the hospital was never recovered by the police nor owner of the vehicle was examined. He has also highlighted contradictions regarding the manner and from whom the car was borrowed for removing the injured to the Hospital. and various other discrepancies. While assessing the evidence of the prosecution witnesses he has strongly argued that the appellant has been framed in this case with a view to sort out the property dispute inter se prosecution witnesses namely Biltu, Kapil, Ram Parkash and the accused. ( 8 ) PW-2 Kapil is an eye witness to the incident. He in his examination-in-chief has deposed that he used to sleep in DESU Park along with Bandal, Biltu and one lady who used to live with Bandal. On the fateful night of 10. 3. 1993 he heard the noise of 'chhatpatahat' and he woke up. He saw the accused holding the lady who was sleeping and giving stone blows to that lady and blood was oozing out of her mouth. The accused after throwing the brick-bat fled away. Pws Biltu and Bandal took the lady to the hospital and he remained at the site. 1993 he heard the noise of 'chhatpatahat' and he woke up. He saw the accused holding the lady who was sleeping and giving stone blows to that lady and blood was oozing out of her mouth. The accused after throwing the brick-bat fled away. Pws Biltu and Bandal took the lady to the hospital and he remained at the site. He never visited the hospital. He came to know about death of the lady later on. ( 9 ) IT is surprising that Kapil who had been sleeping in the Park alongwith other two PWs and the deceased did not know the name of the lady who used to sleep along with them in the park. Not only this, he did not accompany her to the hospital. According to him he had left the place of occurrence at 9. 00 A. M. and he did not know when the police had reached the Park. His statement was recorded by the police on the next day. To the contrary as per the statement of ASI Gautam (PW-12), I. O. of the case he had reached the spot at 8. 00/8. 15 A. M. arid had met PW Kapil. According to ram Parkash (PW-3) when he reached the spot Kapil was not there but Biltu had accompanied him to the spot. According to ASI Gautam, Biltu had not accompanied him to the spot from the hospital. If Kapil was present at the spot, when ASI Gautam visited place of occurrence from hospital, it is not explained as to why he did not record the statement of Kapil at the spot and why his statement was recorded on the next day in the Police Station. Therefore, in these circumstances we find force in the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that presence of Kapil at the spot at the time of alleged incident has become doubtful. ( 10 ) KAPIL (PW-2) in his cross examination and Ram Prakash (PW-3) and biltu (PW-4) have stated that accused had gagged the mouth of Krishna while sitting on her right, side and was giving blows with a brick from his right hand on her face and forehead. According to Biltu and Ram Parkash, krishna had started bleeding from her injuries. Dr. Rani Jain (PW-6) saw blood oozing out from the nose, ear and mouth of Krishna when she examined her on 10. 3. According to Biltu and Ram Parkash, krishna had started bleeding from her injuries. Dr. Rani Jain (PW-6) saw blood oozing out from the nose, ear and mouth of Krishna when she examined her on 10. 3. 1993 at about,6. 00 A. M. She did not see mark of any external injuries, as per her report Ex. PW-6/a. This belies the statement of pw Ram Parkash and Biltu that Krishna was bleeding from her injury, which she received on her face and forehead due to brick blows given by appellant. Even the Postmortem report does not support the oral testimony of these two witnesses. ( 11 ) IT is also not out of place to mention here that Postmortem Report ex. PW-12/t was not proved by Dr. L. T. Ramani who prepared the same after conducting postmortem on the body of Krishna. This document is exhibited by the I. O. in his statement as PW-12, Learned counsel for the appellant, therefore, has rightly pointed out that even the postmortem report has not been proved in evidence properly. ( 12 ) BE that as it may, it is necessary to refer to the injuries which were found on the person of deceased by Dr. Ramani at the time when postmortem was conducted. Following injuries were found on the body of Krishna as per postmortem report Ex. PW-12/t:- 1. Ecchy-mosis over left upper eye-lid. 2. Laceration 11/2" x 1/2" x scalp deep placed vertically on the right occipital region. ON INTERNAL EXAMINATION scalp tissues showed blood clot beneath over left arbital margin; left temporal area and right occipito-perietal region there was depressed fracture of posterior part of right perietal and adjoining temporal bone involving in area of 3" x 21/2". Fissured fracture rediated to the base of skull. Brain showed sub-dural haemorrhage on the left cerebral hemisphere and also showed oedema. Neck structures were normal. There was blood in trachea. Thorosis and abdominal organs were normal. The Doctor had opined that injuries to the skull were ante-mortem caused by blunt weapon and were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Thus, it is clear that doctor did hot find any injury on the face or on the forehead of the deceased. Ecchymosis is the skin discoloration caused by escape of blood into the tissues from ruptured blood vessels. Thus, it is clear that doctor did hot find any injury on the face or on the forehead of the deceased. Ecchymosis is the skin discoloration caused by escape of blood into the tissues from ruptured blood vessels. Therefore, the ecchymosis which was found by doctor over left upper eye lid of deceased Krishna could be caused by the skull injury on the left side which might have resulted into escape of blood into the tissues thereby causing discoloration. In other words, ecchymosis in this case can be said to be a secondary cause of skull injury. There is no other injury on the left eye. There is no lacerated wound found on the forehead or cheek. If Krishna was given brick blows on her face and her forehead she certainly would have received some kind of rupture or lacerated wound on her forehead or on her face. Occipital bone is at the rear bottom of skull and joins parietal and temporal bones of skull, the sphenoid bone in front of it and the first cervical vertebra beneath it. There was depressed fracture of posterior part of right perietal and adjoining temporal bone on the skull of the deceased indicating that she had received head injury on the back of her skull. There was sub-dural haemorrhage on the left cerebral hemisphere. She went into coma because of the above said head injuries and consequently succumbed to her injuries and died just after four hours of the incident; ( 13 ) OBVIOUSLY, we find complete contradiction in the medical evidence and the statements of prosecution witnesses Kapil, Ram Parkash and Biltu as to the nature of injuries. The injuries found on the person of the deceased krishna could not have been caused by brick blows given on the face and forehead while she was sleeping. She would have received injuries on her face and forehead instead of on the base of her skull. Medico evidence is generally of corroborative nature unless it completely rules out the possibilities of the injuries having been inflicted in the manner in which as is deposed by the witnesses. In Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1983 SC 484 it was observed as under:- "13. Ordinarily, the value of medical evidence is only corroborative. It proves that the injuries could have been caused in the manner alleged and nothing more. In Solanki Chimanbhai Ukabhai v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1983 SC 484 it was observed as under:- "13. Ordinarily, the value of medical evidence is only corroborative. It proves that the injuries could have been caused in the manner alleged and nothing more. The use which the defence can make of the medical evidence is to prove that the injuries could not possibly have been caused in the manner alleged and thereby discredit the eye witnesses. Unless, however, the medical evidence in its turn goes so far that it completely rules out all possibilities whatsoever of injuries: taking place in the manner alleged by eye witnesses, the testimony of the eye witnesses cannot be thrown out on the ground of alleged inconsistency between it and the medical evidence. " Reference is also made to State of Bihar v. Bishwanath Rai and Ors, AIR 1997 SC 3818 . Therefore, in the circumstances of this case and from the nature of the evidence as discussed above we are not inclined to accept the testimony of eye witnesses Kapil, Ram Parkash and Biltu which is in complete contradiction to medical evidence. ( 14 ) IN this case FIR Ex. PW-12/g was registered after about four hours of the incident i. e. at 7. 55 A. M on the basis of DD No. 20/a Ex. PW-14/a. Deceased Krishna was brought to the hospital by PW Biltu at about 6. 30 a. M. as per MLC Ex. PW-6/a. Constable Netra Singh (PW-18) informed the police Station vide DD No. 19/a Ex. PW-12/a dated 10. 3. 1993, at 6,45 A. M. about the admission of the deceased in the Hospital by Biltu in injured condition. As per examination-in-chief of ASI Gautam (PW-12), IO of this case, he reached RML Hospital on receipt of DD No. 19/a Ex. PW-12/a at about 5. 45 A. M. or 6. 00 A. M. This part of his statement is in complete contradiction to DD No. 19/a which was recorded at 6. 45 A. M. He sent the rukka to the Police Station only at 7. 40 A. M. after recording the statement of Ram Parkash, There are contradictions even regarding time of arrival of the IO at the Hospital, sending of Rukka to the Police Station, information received at the Police Station, which go unexplained on the record. 45 A. M. He sent the rukka to the Police Station only at 7. 40 A. M. after recording the statement of Ram Parkash, There are contradictions even regarding time of arrival of the IO at the Hospital, sending of Rukka to the Police Station, information received at the Police Station, which go unexplained on the record. According to PW-3, Ram Parkash he gave statement to the IO at 6. 00 A. M. in the hospital. The IO had seized one blood stained tile, one sample tile, one concrete brick and one blood stained Dhoti at the spot which he sealed in separate Pulanda and seized them. Dr. Ramani also handed over the clothes of the deceased in a sealed Pulanda to the IO. The entire case property was sent to the CFSL for chemical and serological analysis. On the basis of biological examination Dr. G. D. Gupta, Senior Scientific Officer found blood on the tile, sample earth (tile) brick, saree of the deceased, her handkerchief, blouse, petticot and another saree. However, in serological examination, ex. PW-12/r human blood of 'a' group was found on the cemented material and the clothes of the deceased and saree recovered from the spot. But on the piece of cemented material (sample earth) there was blood but showed no reaction. Thus, it is clear that even on the sample tile the blood was detected by the CFSL whereas according to the I. O. the sample tile was not blood stained. Contradiction is there even regarding the presence of blood on the brick which was used in hitting the deceased. PW-4 Biltu did not find any blood stains on the brick Ex. P-1 which was used by the appellant for causing injury on the person of Krishna. As per cross-examination of PW-3 ram Parkash he along with Krishna was sleeping on one 'chaddar', but probably the said 'chaddar' was never recovered by the police from the spot. ( 15 ) THE manner in which the investigation has been conducted in this case creates a doubt in the mind of the Court, if at all it was the appellant who was instrumental in killing Krishna. The appellant was not arrested immediately after the incident. In fact he was arrested in a case under the arms Act after about 2 years of the alleged incident under Section 27 of the arms Act. The appellant was not arrested immediately after the incident. In fact he was arrested in a case under the arms Act after about 2 years of the alleged incident under Section 27 of the arms Act. Conspicuously PW Kapil happened to reach the Police Station after arrest of the appellant and identified him in the Police Station. It is not known why Kapil had gone to the Police Station for no rhyme or reason. Therefore, the identity of the accused in the manner explained becomes questionable. It is of significant importance that the name of the appellant was not disclosed at the first instance to the doctor by PW Biltu. It is true that appellant is named in the FIR but it seems that police did not take any effective steps immediately after the incident to arrest the accused. There are various other minor discrepancies in the testimony of the witnesses. Generally these minor contradictions do not affect the veracity of the witness and are to be ignored, but under the circumstances when there are material contradictions and there are parrot like statements given by star witnesses of the prosecution, i. e. Ram Parkash, Biltu and also Kapil whose presence has become doubtful, minor contradictions also become material. ( 16 ) LEARNED counsel for the appellant has further argued that the. prosecution has failed to prove the motive on the part of appellant to kill krishna. True that prosecution has not led any evidence on record, oral or documentary, to indicate that appellant had outraged the modesty of krishna for which she had lodged a complaint in the Police Station and appellant was detained by police on the intervening night of 2nd/3rd March, 1993. It is only complainant Ram Parkash who has narrated the alleged incident as told to him by deceased Krishna. Therefore, the prosecution has even failed to prove any intention on the part of appellant to kill Krishna for his having bad eye on her and his previous involvement in a complaint made by Krishna. ( 17 ) IN view of our discussion as above we are of the view that the learned addl. Therefore, the prosecution has even failed to prove any intention on the part of appellant to kill Krishna for his having bad eye on her and his previous involvement in a complaint made by Krishna. ( 17 ) IN view of our discussion as above we are of the view that the learned addl. Sessions Judge did not fully appreciate the oral testimony of the witnesses in the light of the medical evidence adduced on record, the factum of delay in lodging the FIR and other circumstances in its correct perspective while holding the appellant guilty of having committed an offence under section 302 IPC. ( 18 ) HENCE, under the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the view that appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt. Accordingly the order of conviction 26. 2. 1997 and order of sentence dated 27. 2. 1997 are hereby set aside. The appellant is given benefit of doubt and is hereby acquitted of the offence charged with. Appellant be released forthwith if not required in any other case. ( 19 ) IN view of the efforts put in by learned Amicus Curiae, we direct the state to pay him a fee of Rs. 5500/- within six weeks from today.