JUDGMENT : By Court.-The appellant was tried and convicted by the Trial Judge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. He was sentenced to imprisonment for life. The appeal is against the said conviction and sentence. 2. The .facts are as follows: The deceased Goma Mundain is the daughter of PW-3, Nandi Mundain. The father of the deceased, Goma Mundain, died prior to the date of occurrence, in this case. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant, Jaura Munda and Mochi Munda as well as Lusa Munda are brothers and that they are the agnates of PW-3 (Mochi Munda died pending investigation and Lusa Munda was absconding at the time of filing of the final report). Further case of the prosecution is that since the agnates, namely, the appellant and other two wanted to usurp the landed property of Soma Munda, they murdered the deceased Goma Mundain on the night of 17/18.12.1995. On 17/18.12.1995, PW-3, Nandi Mundain, was sleeping in her house alongwith her unmarried daughter, Goma Mundain, who is deceased in this case. A light was burning in the room. On hearing some sound, she woke up and found the appellant as well as Mochi Munda and Lusa Munda standing at the door step with Baluwa in their hands. They entered the house and thereafter inflicted injuries on Goma Mundain, as a result of which the said Goma Mundain died. On 20.12.1995, some information was received• at the police station. Thereafter the Investigating Officer, PW-6, Sushil Kumar Barla, AS.I. Arki police Station went to the seer e of occurrence and conducted inquest (Ext.2) and later returning to the police station, registered a crime under Crime No. 41 of 1995 on the basis of Ext. 3, the Fardbayan, recorded by him at 1.30 p.m. in the same village. Thereafter, the body was sent to the hospital for autopsy. 3. On receipt of the requisition and the dead body, PW-5, Dr. Umeshwari Kumari, conducted autopsy at 12.40 p.m. on 21.12.1995 and she found the following injuries: "(i) Sharp cut injury from middle of nose to right ear lobule. 6" x 2" x bone depth. (ii) Sharp cut injury right maxillary to mid parital region 6" x 2 ½ x bone deep. (iii) Sharp cut injury from angle of right mandible to mastoid process 5" x 2" x bone cutting. 6" x 2" x bone depth. (ii) Sharp cut injury right maxillary to mid parital region 6" x 2 ½ x bone deep. (iii) Sharp cut injury from angle of right mandible to mastoid process 5" x 2" x bone cutting. (iv) Sharp cut injury from right mastoid region to mid occipital region cutting bone. Brain matter exposed 5" x 1 ½ x cutting the bone. (v) Sharp cut injury 3" x ½ x 1" the root of right little finger upto hypo thinner emitence. (vi) Sharp cut injury 2" x 1" x ½” on the right wrist joint. (vii) Sharp cut injury on left temporal region 2" x ½” x ½.” (viii) Left thumb was amputed." The doctor issued Ext. 1, the post mortem certificate, with her opinion that the death would have been on account of shock and haemorrhage. 4. After the completion of investigation, final report was filed and the appellant denied the circumstances, put against him under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 5. There cannot be any dispute and, in fact, it is not in dispute that Goma Mundain died on account of the injuries suffered by her and that those injuries are homicidal in nature. 6. The prosecution examined her mother, Nandi Mundain, as P.W-3, to prove the case against the appellant. According to PW-3, after taking dinner, they went to bed on 17.12.1995 and later on hearing noise she woke up to find the appellant and two other accused standing at door step with Baluwa in their hands. She has further deposed that the appellant and two others entered the house, inflicted injuries on the deceased, Goma Mundain with Baluwa and left the place. We have to now find out whether her evidence can be accepted and acted upon. 7. The case of the prosecution is that the occurrence took place on 17/18.12.1995. The Fardbayan, Ext. 3, was recorded, according to PW-6, at 1.30 p.m. on 20.12.1995. He has further deposed that on hearing some rumors on 20.12.1995 that the deceased, Goma Mundain, was murdered, he went to the village, conducted inquest and thereafter recorded Ext. 3, the Fardbayan, given by PW-3 and then returned to the police station and registered a crime. The Fardbayan, Ext. 3, was recorded, according to PW-6, at 1.30 p.m. on 20.12.1995. He has further deposed that on hearing some rumors on 20.12.1995 that the deceased, Goma Mundain, was murdered, he went to the village, conducted inquest and thereafter recorded Ext. 3, the Fardbayan, given by PW-3 and then returned to the police station and registered a crime. PW-3 was specific and categorically in her evidence stated that the occurrence took place on Sunday and went on to admit in cross-examination that on the next day, namely, on 18.12.1995, the body was taken by the police officer to Khunti. 8. If that be the case, the police authorities had information about the murder and that they removed the dead body from the scene of occurrence even on 18.12.1995 and the present prosecution version that the complaint, Ext. 3, was recorded at 1.30 p.m. on 20.12.1995, cannot be true. It is also not believable that PW-3, the mother of the deceased, kept quite for three days without laying any complaint at the police station. It is also impossible to believe that none of the witnesses in the village took any steps to go to the police station to give a complaint, if there had been a murder on the night of 17/18.12.1995. There is also a suspicious feature, which we have noticed, on going through the inquest report, Ext. 2, that PW-6, the Investigating Officer, on hearing rumors, he went to the village and conducted inquest. He has further deposed that after the inquest, the statement, Ext.3, given by PW-3 was recorded, which, according to him, was taken to the police station and formal FIR was registered. If inquest was conducted in the village even before registration of the crime (which itself is very unusual and unbelievable) then in the said inquest report, PW-6 could not have mentioned the crime number as no crime was registered, even according to PW-6, at the time when inquest was conducted. 9. On going through the inquest report, we find that the crime no. 41/1995 is found mentioned in the said inquest report and there is no explanation as to how the Investigating Officer, PW-6, mentioned the crime number in the inquest report without even registering a crime. 10. 9. On going through the inquest report, we find that the crime no. 41/1995 is found mentioned in the said inquest report and there is no explanation as to how the Investigating Officer, PW-6, mentioned the crime number in the inquest report without even registering a crime. 10. In any event, as we have already seen, the occurrence, if it had taken place on 17/18.12.1995, there was no complaint till 20.12.1995 and there is no explanation from the side of the prosecution as to the delay in laying the complaint. We, therefore, do not place any reliance upon the evidence of PW-3. It is also to be remembered, at this stage, that according to the prosecution, the motive for the attack on the deceased is that the appellant and the other two accused wanted to usurp the landed property of Soma Munda, who is the husband of PW-3, Nandi Mundain, and father of the deceased. If that was the motive, we are unable to understand as to why the appellant and the other two accused had to cut only the deceased leaving Nandi Mundain, the wife of Soma Munda and mother of the deceased, as she is also the legal heir to the property of her husband. 11. In any event, on going through the evidence of PW-3 and considering the delay in laying the complaint, which is fatal, in the facts and circumstance of the case, we cannot but acquit the appellant. Accordingly, the order of conviction and sentence imposed upon the appellant is set aside and the appellant is acquitted. The appellant Jaura @ Jawara Munda, who is in jail, shall be released forthwith, unless he is wanted in connection with any other case(s).