VIJAY KUMAR VERMA, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 25. 3. 1982 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Moradabad in S. T. No. 624 of 1979 (State v. Kalloo and others), whereby the appellant accused Kalloo @ Kalwa has been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under section 302 of Indian Penal Code (in short, i. P. C. ), and the appellants-accused Smt. Sharifan, Iliyas and Ali Husain have been convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life under section 302 read with section 34ipc 2. During pendency of this appeal, the appellants-accused Kalloo and Smt. Sharifan have died and hence, the appeal against them has been abated vide order dated 24. 7. 2007. 3. The incident resulting in the death of Raunaq S/o Aziz (P. W. 7), resident of village Ratanpur, P. S. Pakwara District Moradabad occurred in the intervening night of 28/29. 9. 1979. The dead body of the deceased was recovered from the court yard of the house of accused Smt. . Sharifan, situated in village Mudhia Malookpur P. S. Munda Pandey, District Moradabad. The deceased was the son-in-law of accused Smt. Sharifan and was married to her sec ond daughter Shaqueena. Accused Kalloo was also the son-in-law of accused Shari fan, who was married to her eldest daugh ter. Accused Iliyas and Ali Husain are the sons of Smt. Sharifan. 4. The First Information Report re garding the incident of committing the murder of deceased Raunaq was lodged at P. S. Munda Pandey by Chheda Lal (P. W. 1 ). S/o Bhoi Rai resident of village Mudhia Malookpur. It is alleged in the First Infor mation Report Ext. Ka 1 that Bhoj Raj, fa ther of the first informant Chheda Lal is the chaukidar of village Mudhia Malookpur. Due to his old age and short sight, the first informant was patrolling in the village in night of 28/29. 9. 1979. He heard noise from the house of Sharifan at about 1. 30 a. m. , on which he reached there and saw that Raunaq S/o Aziz resident of village Ratanpur, to whom Sharifans daughter is married, is lying dead in the courtyard. On inquiry, the first informant came to know that murder of Raunaq has been committed by his Sadhu Kalloo, mother- in-law Sharifan and both brothers-in-law Iliyas and Ali Husain by means of gandasa. On inquiry, the first informant came to know that murder of Raunaq has been committed by his Sadhu Kalloo, mother- in-law Sharifan and both brothers-in-law Iliyas and Ali Husain by means of gandasa. Ram Pal Singh Thakur, Ahmad Husain and some other persons of village were present there. 5. Leaving village people at the place of incident, the first informant Chheda Lal went to P. S. Munda Pandey and gave oral information about the incident. On the ba sis of that information, the then head mo-harrir Jhamman Lal ( P. W. 4) prepared chick FIR Ext. Ka 1 and registered a case under section 302 IPC at Crime No. 181/1979 on 29. 9. 1979 at 3. 10 a. m. against (1) Kalloo (2) Sharifan (3) Iliyas and (4) Ali Husain. Entry in G. D. No. 5 Ext. Ka 3 was also made at the same time about registra tion of the case. 6. S. I. Iqbal Ahmad Zaidi (P. W. 6) was present at P. S. Munda Pandey at the time of registration of the FIR. The investi gation of the case was entrusted to him. He recorded the statement of Chheda Lal at police station itself and thereafter pro ceeded to the place of incident along with other police personnel. After reaching on the place of incident, the inquest proceeding on the dead body of deceased was con ducted by him on 29. 9. 1979, during which inquest report Ext. Ka 4, photo lash Ext Ka 5, challan lash Ext Ka 6, letter CMO Moradabad Ext. Ka 7, letter R. I. Ext. Ka 8 and seal impression Ext. Ka 9 were pre pared and thereafter the dead body in sealed condition was sent through the con stables Tota Ram (P. W. 2) and Jalim Singh for post-mortem examination, which was conducted on 30. 9. 1979 at 12. 00 Noon. The genuineness of post-mortem report Ext. Ka 7 has been admitted by the defence counsel. Hence this report is admissible in evi dence. According to the post-mortem re port, the following ante-mortem injuries were found on the person of deceased. (1) Incised wound on the scalp right side. . . (illegable) 2 cm. x 1 cm x muscle deep. (2) Incised wound on the middle of scalp 2-1/2 cm. Hence this report is admissible in evi dence. According to the post-mortem re port, the following ante-mortem injuries were found on the person of deceased. (1) Incised wound on the scalp right side. . . (illegable) 2 cm. x 1 cm x muscle deep. (2) Incised wound on the middle of scalp 2-1/2 cm. x 1 cm x muscle deep (3) Incised wound on the back of neck in the middle line 4 cm x one and half cm. x muscle deep. (4) Incised wound on the side of neck on right side 2 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep, 4 cm behind the right auricle. (5) Incised wound on the right side of neck, 3 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep size 1 cm behind right auricle. (6) Incised wound on the right side of base of neck 4 cm skin deep. (7) Incised wound on the tip of right shoulder 6 cm x 0. 1/2 cm x skin deep. (8) Incised wound on the neck (left side) 9 cm x 3 cm x muscle deep, 5 cm in front of right auricle. (9) Incised wound on the chest 4 cm x 1-1/2 cm x muscle deep at the right side of sternum (ulterior ). (10) Incised wound on the meddle of shaft of left lower arm 7 cm x 3 cm x muscle deep. (11) Incised wound on the left side of left scapula 8 cm x 1/2 cm x skin deep. (12) Incised wound on the front of left scapula 12 cm x 1/2 cm x skin deep. (13) Incised wound on the left lumber region 5 cm. x 1/2 cm. x skin deep. (14) Incised wound on the right wrist 5 cm x 3 cm x bone deep underlying bone fractured. (15) Incised wound below the lower lip 7 cm x 1/2 cm x skin deep. (16) Incised wound at the left side of right nostril 2 cm x 1 cm x skin deep. In the opinion of the Medical Officer, who conducted the post-mortem examina tion, the death was caused about one and half day back due to shock and haemor rhage as a result of multiple ante-mortem injuries. 7. (16) Incised wound at the left side of right nostril 2 cm x 1 cm x skin deep. In the opinion of the Medical Officer, who conducted the post-mortem examina tion, the death was caused about one and half day back due to shock and haemor rhage as a result of multiple ante-mortem injuries. 7. After conducting inquest proceed ings and sending the dead body for post mortem examination, S. I. Iqbal Ahmad collected simple and blood stained earth from the place where the dead body was found lying and after filling the same in two containers, fard Ext. Ka 10 was pre pared. A blood stained dari (Ext. 6) was found lying on the place of incident, which was taken into possession and fard Ext Ka 11 was prepared in this regard. It was told by Haseena, wife of the accused Iliyas, that this dari was lying on the cot on which the deceased Raunaq was sleeping at the time of incident. On the same day one kurta Ext. 7, paijama Ext. 8, a pair of shoes Ext. 9 of the deceased Raunak were also taken into possession and fard Ext. Ka 12 was pre pared. The statements of witnesses Ram Pal Singh and Ahmad Husain were recorded thereafter. These witnesses had shown their torches to the Investigating Officer which were taken into possession and given in their supurdagi vide supurdagi-nama Ext. Ka 2. Thereafter site plan Ext. Ka 13 was prepared by P. W. 6 after making spot inspection. On the same day at about 4. 00 p. m. the accused Kalloo and Sarifan were arrested from the railway station Munda Pandey and on personal search of the accused Kalloo a bag containing one paijama Ext. 2 and one baniyan Ext. 3 was recovered and fard Ext. Ka 14 was pre pared. Thereafter both the accused along with recovered articles were brought to P. S. Munda Pandey, where entry was made in G. D. No. 23 Ext. Ka 18. The accused Iliyas was arrested by P. W. 6 on 30. 9. 1979 from village Dalpatpur. Thereafter the investi gation was taken in his hands by S. O. Achal Singh on 4. 10. 1979 who after com pleting the investigation, submitted charge-sheet Ext. Ka 16 against all the four ac cused. 8. The baniyan, paijama, bag, dari etc. Ka 18. The accused Iliyas was arrested by P. W. 6 on 30. 9. 1979 from village Dalpatpur. Thereafter the investi gation was taken in his hands by S. O. Achal Singh on 4. 10. 1979 who after com pleting the investigation, submitted charge-sheet Ext. Ka 16 against all the four ac cused. 8. The baniyan, paijama, bag, dari etc. were sent for chemical examination to Forensic Science Laboratory, U. P. Lucknow, report whereof is Ext. Ka 18. According to this report, stains of blood were found on baniyan, paijama, dari and ring. 9. On the case being committed to the Court of session for trial, charge under section 302 IPC against the accused Kalloo and separate charge under section 302 read with section 34 IPC against the accused Sharifan, Iliyas and Ali Husain were framed, to which they all pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 10. The prosecution in order to bring home the charges to the accused persons examined seven witnesses in all. P. W. 1 Chheda Lal is the first informant, who had lodged the FIR at P. S. Munda Pandey. He is not the eye-witness of the incident. P. W. 2 constable Tota Ram is the dead body car rier, who along with constable Jalim Singh had carried the dead body of deceased Raunaq for post-mortem examination. P. W. 3 Ram Pal Singh and P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain are said to be the eye-witnesses of the incident of committing murder of de ceased Raunaq. P. W. 4 Jhamman Lal is the scribe of chik FIR Ext. Ka 1 and G. D. of registration of the case Ext. Ka 3. P. W. 6 Iqbal Ahmad Zaidi is the first Investigating Officer, who has proved various papers as mentioned herein-above. Charge-sheet Ext. Ka 16 has also been proved by this witness by recognizing the handwriting and signa ture of S. O. Achal Singh, the 2nd Investi gating Officer. P. W. 7 Aziz is the father of deceased, who has deposed regarding the motive of committing the murder of his son Raunaq. 11. In their statements recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Proce dure (in short the Cr. P. C. ) the accused persons denying their participation in the incident of murder of the deceased Raunaq have stated that they are not aware as to why they have been implicated in this case. 11. In their statements recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Proce dure (in short the Cr. P. C. ) the accused persons denying their participation in the incident of murder of the deceased Raunaq have stated that they are not aware as to why they have been implicated in this case. 12. In defence the accused persons have examined D. W. 1 Prem Babu Shukla Advocate, who has proved affidavit paper No. 20-B. This affidavit is said to be of the witness Ahmad Husain. The accused per sons have further examined Saqueena as D. W. 2, who is said to be the wife of de ceased. 13. After taking entire evidence into consideration, the learned Trial Court con victed and sentenced the appellants-accused as stated in para 1 above. Hence, this appeal. 14. We have heard Sri Rupak Chaubey learned Counsel for the accused Iliyas and All Husain, Sri Ram Milan Dwivedi learned AGA for the respondent/state and perused the impugned judge ment and entire evidence on record care fully. 15. It is not disputed by the accused persons that dead body of deceased Rau-naq was recovered from the house of ac cused Sharifan. Even a suggestion was not put to any witness denying the recovery of the dead body of deceased from the court yard of the house. A specific question was put to the accused Smt. Sharifan in her ex amination under section 313 Cr. P. C. that the dead body of Raunaq was recovered from her house by darogaji (investigating officer), whether she wants to say some thing in this regard. Answer to this ques tion has been given in negative meaning thereby that the accused sharifan does not want to say anything in this regard. Similar question was put to the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain in their examination under sec tion 313 Cr. P. C. and they also have an swered the said question in negative. These accused could deny the recovery of dead body from their house, but in answer to the specific question framed in this regard by the Trial Court, these accused have not stated that the dead body of deceased Rau naq was not recovered from their house. P. C. and they also have an swered the said question in negative. These accused could deny the recovery of dead body from their house, but in answer to the specific question framed in this regard by the Trial Court, these accused have not stated that the dead body of deceased Rau naq was not recovered from their house. On the basis of the reliable testimony of the witnesses examined by the prosecution, it is fully proved beyond reasonable doubt that dead body of the deceased was found lying in the courtyard of the accused Smt. Sharifan. This fact finds corroboration from the site plan Ext. Ka 13 also. Although the dead body of deceased was recovered from the courtyard of the house of these accused persons, but they have not furnished any explanation about availability of the dead body in the courtyard of their house. Being inmates of the house from where the dead body of deceased was recovered, these accused were required to furnish explanation about availability of the dead body in their courtyard, but for the reasons best known to them, they have not furnished any ex planation about availability of the dead body in their courtyard and recovery thereof by the police from there. 16. Regarding the incident of com mitting the murder of deceased Raunaq on the alleged date, time and place, the prose cution has examined P. W. 3 Ram Pal Singh and P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain as eye witnesses. Both these witnesses are the neighbourer of the accused Smt. Sharifan. As would appear from the site plan Ext. Ka 13, the houses of the witnesses Ram Pal Singh and Ahmad Husain are situated near the house of the accused Smt. Sharifan in eastern and southern side respectively. Both these witnesses have fully supported the case of prosecution in their statements. Giving sound reasons, the learned Trial Court has rightly placed reliance on the testimony of these witnesses and we too find no infirmity in their testimony. 17. P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain was exam ined in Trial Court on 26. 2. 1982. He has stated in his statement that about two year five months ago, he was sleeping in the vacant land of Hafiz. At about 1. 17. P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain was exam ined in Trial Court on 26. 2. 1982. He has stated in his statement that about two year five months ago, he was sleeping in the vacant land of Hafiz. At about 1. 30 a. m. in the night, he awakened on the hue and cry from the house of Smt. Sharifan and when he having a lathi and torch reached near the tree situated in the house of Sharifan, he saw that the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain were catching hold of the legs of Raunaq in their courtyard and the accused Kalloo was assaulting him by gandasa and Smt. Shari fan was exhorting saying "kill Raunaq". It is further stated by this witness that after committing the murder of Raunaq, the accused persons went inside the house and immediately thereafter they came out and went away saying that if anybody would intervene, they would not spare him also. P. W. 5 has further stated that when Kalloo was assaulting Raunaq by gandasa, he (Kalloo) was wearing paijama and baniyan, but when committing the murder of deceased the accused persons came out from house and went from there, Kalloo was wearing shirt and tehmad and he was having a bag in his hand. Seeing the trou sers (paijama) Ext 2 and baniyan Ext. 3 in Court, P. W. 5 has stated that this paijama and baniyan are the same which the ac cused Kalloo was wearing at the time of incident. The witness was subjected to cross-examination, but nothing material could be elicited from his mouth so as to discard the creditworthiness of his state ment. This witness has no enmity with the accused persons and he was not related in any manner to the deceased. There was no reason for him to depose falsely against accused persons. The testimony of this wit ness is wholly reliable, on the basis on which it is fully proved beyond reasonable doubt that murder of deceased Raunaq was committed on the exhortation of the ac cused Smt. Sharifan by the accused Kalloo by inflicting injuries to him by means of gandasa and at the time of assaulting the deceased, the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain were catching hold of his legs. 18. 18. Although P. W. 3 Ram Pal Singh has also given eye-witness account about the incident of murder of deceased in his statement recorded in Trial Court on 30. 11. 1981, but about his arrival on the place of incident, P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain has stated in his cross-examination that when 10-20 persons of village had come there at the place of incident, Ram Pal also had reached there following them. If on the basis of this statement of P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain, it is assumed that P. W. 3 Ram Pal Singh had not seen the actual incident of committing murder of deceased by the ac cused persons, even then on the basis of his testimony, it is established that after committing the murder of deceased, the accused persons went away after coming out from their house giving threatening and at that time they were having a bag. 19. The oral evidence led by the prosecution finds corroboration from the medical evidence. We have already men tioned ante-mortem injuries which were found on the person of deceased at the time of post-mortem examination. As many as sixteen ante-mortem incised wounds were found on the person of deceased. All these wounds can be caused by gandasa, which is a sharp edged weapon. Since the genuineness of the post-mortem report Ext. Ka 17 was admitted by the Counsel of the ac cused persons in Trial Court, hence the prosecution was not required to examine the medical officer, who conducted post mortem examination, as on admitting its genuineness, the entire post-mortem report including ante-mortem injuries noted therein is admissible in evidence in view of the provisions of section 294 Cr. P. C. There fore, on the basis of the post-mortem report also, this fact is established that murder of Raunaq was committed by means of sharp edge weapon. The post-mortem examina tion on the dead body of deceased was conducted on 30. 9. 1979 at 12. 00 noon and according to the post-mortem report Ext. Ka 17, all the ante- mortem injuries were caused about one and half day ago by sharp edged weapon. As such the ante-mortem injuries were possible to be caused in the intervening night of 28/29. 9. 1979 at about 1. 30 a. m. 20. 9. 1979 at 12. 00 noon and according to the post-mortem report Ext. Ka 17, all the ante- mortem injuries were caused about one and half day ago by sharp edged weapon. As such the ante-mortem injuries were possible to be caused in the intervening night of 28/29. 9. 1979 at about 1. 30 a. m. 20. The testimony of the witness Ah mad Husain has been assailed by the learned Counsel for the appellants contend ing that this witness had filed an affidavit in Lower Court in which he had stated that he did not see any incident and hence on this ground no reliance can be placed on his testimony. We find no force in this contention, because in his statement re corded in Trial Court, P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain has made it clear that his thumb impressions were obtained on some blank papers by the accused Kalloo saying that compromise had taken place and hence he would be relieved from giving evidence. There is no reason to disbelieve the state ment of Ahmad Husain and on the basis of his statement it is established that his thumb impressions on some papers were obtained by playing fraud with him on the pretext that compromise had taken place between the parties and hence he would be relieved from giving evidence. It is specifi cally stated by P. W. 5 in his cross-examination that the alleged affidavit was not prepared at his instance and he did not put his thumb impression on the said affi davit after hearing the contents thereof. It is also specifically stated by him that his thumb impressions were obtained on the blank papers by the accused Kalloo and he did not put his thumb impression after the paper was typed. This aspect has been dealt with in detail in the impugned judg ment by the learned Trial Judge, who also has held that affidavit paper No. 20-B was obtained by the Counsel of the accused persons by deceiving the witness Ahmad Husain and playing fraud on the Court. We fully agree with the findings recorded by the learned Trial Court on this matter. We fully agree with the findings recorded by the learned Trial Court on this matter. Therefore, no reliance can be placed on the testimony of D. W. I Prem Babu Shukla Ad vocate, who has been examined by the ac cused persons to prove the affidavit paper No. 20-B. The statement of this witness has been rightly found unreliable by the learned Court below giving cogent reasons in the impugned judgment. Therefore, the testimony of P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain cannot be said to be unreliable due to the affidavit paper No. 20-B. 21. On the basis of the oral and medi cal evidence as mentioned herein-above, this fact is fully established beyond reason able doubt that murder of the deceased Raunaq was committed by the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention in the intervening night of 28/29. 9. 1979 at about mid night in the house of Smt. Sharifan and at the time of incident, the appellants-accused Iliyas and Ali Husain also had played an active role bycatching hold of the legs of the deceased at the time of inflicting injuries to him by the accused Kalloo on the exhortation of the accused Smt. Sharifan. The learned Trial Court after proper appreciation of the evidence giving cogent and sound reasons in the impugned judgement has rightly convicted all the accused persons the offences with which they were charged. 22. It was vehemently contended by the learned Counsel for the appellants that there was no motive for the accused persons to commit the murder of deceased, who was their near relative and some un known enemies of the deceased might have committed his murder, as the deceased himself was a hardened criminal and he was having enmity with many other per sons. We are not impressed with this sub mission. It is a case of direct evidence and on the basis of cogent and reliable testi mony of P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain it is fully proved beyond reasonable doubt that murder of the deceased was committed by the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention. Therefore, in such situation weakness or absence of motive looses significance. It is well settled prin ciple of law that where there is direct reli able evidence to prove the crime, the mat ter of motive looses significance. Therefore, in such situation weakness or absence of motive looses significance. It is well settled prin ciple of law that where there is direct reli able evidence to prove the crime, the mat ter of motive looses significance. In the case of Thaman Kumar v. State of Union Territory of Chandigarh, 2003 (7) AIC 297 (SC) = 2003 (47) ACC 7 (SC) the Honble Apex Court has observed as under: - There is no such principle or rule of law that where the prosecution fails to prove the motive for commission of the crime, it must necessary result in acquittal of the accused. Where the ocular evidence is found to be trustworthy and reliable and finds corroboration from the medical evi dence, a finding of guilt can safely be re corded even if the motive for the commis sion of the crime has not been proved. " 23. In the case of State of H. P. v. Jeet Singh, 1999 (38) ACC 550 (SC) the Apex Court has made the fol lowing observations: - "no doubt it is a sound principle to remember that every criminal act was done with a motive but its corollary is not that no criminal of fence would have been committed if the prosecution has failed to prove the precise motive of the ac cused to commit it. When the prosecution succeeded in showing the possibility of some ire for the accused towards the victim, the in ability to further put on record the manner in which such ire would have swelled up in the mind of the offender to such a degree as to impel him to commit the offence can not be construed as a fatal weak ness of the prosecution. It is almost an impossibility for the prosecution to unravel the full dimension of the mental disposition of an offender towards the person whom he of fended. " 24. The following observations re garding motive made by the Honble Apex Court in the case of Nathuni Yadav and oth ers v. State of Bihar and another 1997 (34) ACC 576 are worth mentioning: - "motive for doing a criminal act is gen erally a difficult area for prosecu tion. One cannot normally see into the mind of another. Motive is the emotion which impels a man to do a particular act. 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 murders have been committed without any known or prominent motive. It is quite pos sible that the aforesaid impelling factor would remain undiscoverable. Lord Chief Justice Chambell struck a note of caution in reg v. Palmer 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 importance. We know, from experience of Criminal Courts that 0 atrocious crimes of this sort have been committed from very slight mo tives; not merely from malice and revenge, but to gain a small pecu niary advantage, and to drive off for a time pressing difficulties. " 25. In the case of Molu and others v. State of Haryana, AIR 1976 SC 2499 the Honble Apex Court has held as under in para 11 of the report at page 2505: - "it is well settled that where the direct evidence regarding the assault is worthy of credence and can be be lieved, the question of motive be comes more or less academic. Sometimes the motive is clear and can be proved and sometimes, however, the motive is shrouded in mystery and it is very difficult to locate the same. If, however, the evidence of the eye-witnesses is credit-worthy and is believed by the Court which has placed im plicit reliance on them, the ques tion whether there is any motive or not becomes wholly irrelevant. " 26. Regarding motive for commission of crime, the Apex Court has observed as under in the case of Suresh Chandra Bahri v. State of Bihar, AIR 1994 SC 2420 in para 21 of the report at page 2429: - "sometimes motive plays an important role and becomes a compelling force to commit a crime and there fore motive behind the crime is a relevant factor for which evidence may be adduced. A motive is something which prompts a person to form an opinion or intention to do certain illegal act or even a legal act but with illegal means with a view to achieve that intention. A motive is something which prompts a person to form an opinion or intention to do certain illegal act or even a legal act but with illegal means with a view to achieve that intention. In a case where there is clear proof of motive for the commission of the crime it affords added support to the finding of the Court that the ac cused was guilty for the offence charged with. But it has to be re membered that the absence of proof of motive does not render the evidence bearing on the guilt of the accused nonetheless untrustworthy or unreliable because most often it is only the perpetrator of the crime alone who knows as to what cir cumstances prompted him to a certain course of action leading to the commission of the crime. " 27. Moreover, on the basis of the tes timony of P. W. 7 Aziz, this fact is borne out that the accused persons wanted to get rid of the deceased Raunaq, as they were in tending to sell his wife Saqueena. P. W. 7 Aziz is the father of deceased, He was ex amined in Trial Court on 1. 3. 1983. He has stated in his statement that his son Raunaq was married to Saqueena, daughter of the accused Sharifan and accused Kalloo is his sadhu, who is the resident of Machhariya, P. S. Katghar. It is further stated by the wit ness Aziz that about a month before the murder of his son Raunaq, the accused Kalloo had carried Saqueena to his house and when Raunaq came to know that Kal loo is intending to sell Saqueena, he had brought her from the house of Kalloo and when they came to know that Sharifan also wanted to sell her, Raunaq 1 did not send her (Saqueena) either to village Machhariya or to her Maiyaka in village Mudhia Malook- pur. P. W. 7 has further stated that his one she-buffalo was being brought-up in the sasural of Raunaq and two or three days before the incident of his murder, the ac cused Iliyas and Kalloo had come to his house and they had asked him to bring his she-buffalo, on which Raunaq had told that he would come after two or three days to bring the she-buffalo. It is further stated by P. W. 7 Aziz that murder of Raunaq was committed in the night of the day, on which he had gone to the house of Sharifan to bring the she- buffalo. Nothing material could be elicited from this witness in cross-examination and hence there is no reason to disbelieve the aforesaid statement made by him. As such the prosecution has suc ceeded to show that the accused Kalloo and Smt. Sharifan were intending to sell Saqueena, wife of the deceased and since the deceased was not sending Saqueena either to the house of Kalloo or Smt. Shari fan, hence the accused persons wanted to get rid of him. Therefore, it cannot be said that there was no motive for the accused persons to commit the murder of deceased. 28. Regarding the complicity of the appellants-accused Iliyas and Ali Husain in the incident of murder of deceased Raunaq, it was contended by their learned Counsel that theory of catching hold of the legs of deceased by these accused is not worthy of reliance, because ante-mortem injury No. 3 was on the back of neck of deceased, which falsified the theory of catching hold of his legs at the time of incident. We are not at all impressed with this argument. It is true that according to the post-mortem report Ext. Ka 17, ante-mortem injury No. 3 (incised wound) was on the back of neck of deceased in the middle line, but on this basis the theory of catching hold of the legs of deceased by the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain is not falsified. When the deceased was being assaulted by the accused Kalloo, he certainly would have been moving here and there and he would not remain lying like a idol at the time of inflicting injuries. Therefore, sustaining injury by the de ceased on the back of his neck at the time of catching hold of his legs is not impossible. The complicity of the appellants accused Iliyas and Ali Husain is also not falsified due to the ante-mortem injuries on other parts of the person of deceased, because in our considered opinion, all the ante-mortem injuries could easily be caused to the deceased by the accused Kalloo in the process of catching hold of his legs by the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain. We do not agree with the contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants that injury on the back side of the body of deceased can not be caused in the process of catching hold of his legs. On the basis of the cogent and reliable evidence of P. W. 5 Ahinad Husain, the complicity of the appellants-accused Iliyas and Ali Husain and their active participation in the incident of mur der of deceased Raunaq by catching hold of his legs is fully proved beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, merely due to the ante-mortem injuries on all parts of the de ceased, it cannot be said that the role of catching hold of his legs by the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain has been falsely as signed to them. 29. It was further submitted regard ing the complicity of the appellants-accused Iliyas and Ali Husain that these accused were living in village Machhariya and they were not present in their house on the fateful night. For this contention our attention has been drawn towards the statement of P. W. 1 Chheda Lal. who has stated in para 8 of his statement that it is known to him that Sarifans son Iliyas and Ali 2 Husain carry on agricultural work in village Machhariya. On the basis of this statement, it was contended by the learned Counsel for the appellants that the accused Illiyas and Ali Husain used to live in vil lage Machhariya where they were carrying on agricultural work and they were not present in village Mudhia Malookpur, where the murder of the deceased was committed. We do not find any force in this contention also. It is only stated by P. W. I Chheda Lal that Sharifans son Iliyas and Ali Husain carry on agricultural work in village Machhariya. This witness has no where stated that they were living in vil lage Machhariya. Moreover, from the statement of P. W. I Chheda Lal also, this fact is borne out that when he reached the house of accused Sharifan on hearing noise from there in the fateful night, he was told by the witnesses Ram Pal Singh and Ah mad Husain that murder of Raunaq has been committed by Sharifan, Kalloo, Illiyas and Ali Husain. On the basis of the testi mony of this witness, this fact is also estab lished that when he reached the house of accused Sharifan, the dead body of Raunaq was lying in the courtyard of her house. In their statements recorded under section 313 Cr. P. C, the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain have not denied that dead body of de ceased was recovered from their house. These accused have nowhere stated in their statements that they were not present in their house in the fateful night and were residing in village Machhariya. Question No. 10 put to these accused in their exami nation under section 313 Cr. P. C. is "whether they have to say something more". The answer has been given in negative by both the accused. In answer to question No. 10, these accused could easily say that prior to the incident they were living in village Machhanya and were not present in their house in village Mudhia Malookpur in the fateful night, but no such statement has been made by them. The ac cused persons have not examined any wit ness to show that the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain were living in village Machhariya prior to the incident and they were not pre sent in their house in the fateful night. On the contrary, on the basis of the reliable testimony of the witnesses Ram Pal Singh and Ahmad Husain, the presence of the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain in their house in the fateful night is fully estab lished beyond reasonable doubt. On the basis of the wholly reliable testimony of P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain, it is also proved that the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain were catching hold of the legs of the deceased at the time of inflicting injuries to him by the accused Kalloo on the exhortation of ac cused Smt. Sharifan. Therefore, the contention of learned Counsel for the appellants that the accused Iliyas and Ali Husain were not present in their house in the fateful night has got no force. 30. Regarding the recovery of blood stained baniyan and paijama from the bag which was recovered from the accused Kalloo at the time of his arrest on 29. 9. 1979, it was submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellants that copy of the recovery memo Ext. 30. Regarding the recovery of blood stained baniyan and paijama from the bag which was recovered from the accused Kalloo at the time of his arrest on 29. 9. 1979, it was submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellants that copy of the recovery memo Ext. Ka 14 was not furnished to the accused Kalloo and hence on this ground the recovery of blood stained baniyan and paijama is falsified. For this submission the learned Counsel has placed reliance on the case of Jackaran Singh v. State of Punjabi It is true that the recovery memo Ext. Ka 14 does not bear the thumb impression or sig nature of the accused Kalloo, but on this ground the recovery of blood stained paijama and baniyan from the possession of accused Kalloo is not falsified, because on the basis of the reliable testimony of P. W. 6 S. I. Iqbal Ahmad Zaidi it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused Kalloo and Sharifan were arrested from the rail way station Munda Pandey on 29. 9. 1979 at about 4. 00 p. m. and at that time the ac cused Kalloo was carrying a bag in his hand from which blood stained paijama Ext. 2 and baniyan Ext. 3 3 were recovered. Blood was found on the said paijama and baniyan by the Chemical Examiner vide report Ext. Ka 18. Moreover, if the evidence regarding recovery of the blood stained paijama and baniyan from the possession of accused Kalloo is not taken into consideration, even then his complicity in the incident of committing murder of deceased Raunaq is not falsified, because on the basis of the wholly reliable testimony of P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain, it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused Kalloo had inflicted injuries to the deceased Raunaq by means of gandasa in the intervening night of 28/29. 9. 1979 in the house of his mother-in-law Smt. Sharifan. 31. 9. 1979 in the house of his mother-in-law Smt. Sharifan. 31. It was further submitted by the learned Counsel for the appellants that Haseena, wife of the accused Iliyas, was present in the house in the fateful night and hence she could be the best witness to de pose regarding the incident of murder of deceased Raunaq and since she has not been examined during trial, hence adverse inference would be drawn against the prosecution and on this ground it can be said that murder of deceased was not committed in the house of accused Shari fan. We do not find any force in this con tention. Smt. Haseena is the wife of the ac cused Iliyas. She would not give evidence against her husband. Hence, if she was not examined during trial, then no adverse in ference can be drawn against the prosecu tion, because the prosecution is not bound to examine all the witnesses by whom the incident is said to have been witnessed. 32. The learned Counsel for the appel lants further vehemently contended that P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain is also the witness of inquest proceeding and he has signed the inquest report Ext. Ka 4, but name of the accused persons is not mentioned therein and on this basis it can be said that some unknown persons had committed the mur der of deceased and the accused persons have been falsely implicated in this case. The contention of the learned Counsel for the appellants was that had the accused persons committed the murder of de ceased, and if P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain had witnessed the incident of murder, then name of the accused persons ought to have mentioned in inquest report and since the name of the accused persons are not mentioned in this report, hence on this ground the accused persons are liable to be acquit ted. We are not at all impressed with this contention. It is true that Ahmad Husain P. W. 5 is also the witness of inquest report Ext. Ka 4, but due to non-mentioning of the names of accused persons in this inquest report, it cannot be inferred that the mur der of deceased was committed by un known persons, because it is not the re quirement of law to mention the name of witnesses and accused in the inquest report. Ka 4, but due to non-mentioning of the names of accused persons in this inquest report, it cannot be inferred that the mur der of deceased was committed by un known persons, because it is not the re quirement of law to mention the name of witnesses and accused in the inquest report. In this regard reference may be made to the case of Radhamohan Singh @ Lal Saheb and others v. State of U. P. 2006 (54) ACC 862 (SC) (SC) It is settled law now that mentioning of the name of accused persons or weapons carried by them and names of the eye-witnesses in the inquest report is not the requirement of law. Inquest report is confined to the ascertainment of the apparent cause of death and it need not mention, who assaulted the deceased and who were the witnesses of the assault. 33. The provision for holding of in quest is contained in section 174 Cr. P. C. and the heading of section is, police to en quire and report on suicide etc. Sub sections (1) and (2) thereof read as under: - 4 174. Police to enquire and report on suicide, etc.- (1) When the officer in charge of a police station or some other police officer specially empowered by the State Government in that behalf receives information that a person has committed suicide, or has been killed by another or by an animal or by machinery or by an accident, or has died under cir cumstances raising a reasonable suspicion that some other person has committed an offence, he shall immediately give intimation thereof to the nearest Executive Magistrate empowered to hold in quests, and, unless otherwise directed by any rule prescribed by the State Government, or by any general or special order of the Dis trict or Sub-Divisional Magistrate, shall proceed to the place where the body of such deceased person is, and there in the presence of two or more respectable inhabitants of the neighbourhood, shall make an investigation, and draw up a re port of the apparent cause of death, describing such wounds, fractures, bruises, and other marks of injury as may be found on the body, and stating in what manner, or by what weapon or instrument (if any), such marks appear to have been inflicted. (2) The report shall be signed by such police officer and other persons, or by so many of them as concur therein, and shall be forthwith for warded to the District Magistrate or the Sub-Divisional Magistrate. 34. The language of the aforesaid statutory provision is plain and simple and there is no ambiguity therein. An investi gation under section 174 Cr. P. C. is limited in scope and is confined to the ascertain ment of the apparent cause of death. It is concerned with discovering whether in a given case the death was accidental, suici dal and homicidal or caused by animal. It is for this limited purpose that persons ac quainted with the facts of the case are A summoned and examined under section 175 Cr. P. C. The details of the overt acts are not necessary to be recorded in the inquest report. The question regarding the details as to how the deceased was assaulted or who assaulted him or under what circum stances he was assaulted or who are the witnesses of the assault is foreign to the ambit and scope of proceedings under sec tion 174 Cr. P. C. Neither in practice nor in law it is necessary for the person holding the inquest to mention all these details. 35. In Podda Narayana v. State of A, P. , AIR 1975 SC 1252 it was held by the Honble Apex Court that the proceedings under section 174 Cr. P. C. have a very limited scope. The object of the proceedings is merely to ascertain whether a person has died under suspicious cir cumstances or an unnatural death and if so what is the apparent cause of the death. The question regarding the details as to how the deceased was assaulted or who assaulted him or under what circumstances he was assaulted is foreign to the ambit and scope of the proceedings under section 174. Neither in practice nor in law was it necessary for the police to mention those details in the inquest report. It is, therefore, not necessary to enter all the details of the overt acts in the inquest report. Their omission is not sufficient to put the prosecution out of Court. 5 36. Neither in practice nor in law was it necessary for the police to mention those details in the inquest report. It is, therefore, not necessary to enter all the details of the overt acts in the inquest report. Their omission is not sufficient to put the prosecution out of Court. 5 36. In Shakila Khader v. Nausher Gama, 1976 (13) ACC 236 (SC) = AIR 1975 SC 1324 the contention raised that non-mention of a persons name in the inquest report would show that he was not a eye-witness of the incident was repelled on the ground that an inquest under section 174 Cr. P. C. is con cerned with establishing the cause of death and only evidence necessary to establish it need be brought out. The same view was taken in Eqbal Baig v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1986 (23) ACC 181 (SC) = AIR 1987 SC 923 that the non-mention of name of an eye witness in the inquest report could not be a ground to reject his testimony. Similarly, the absence of the name of the accused in the inquest report cannot lead to an inference that he was not present at the time of com mission of the offence, as the inquest report is not the statement of a person wherein all the names (accused and also the eye witnesses) ought to have been mentioned. 37. The view taken in Podda Narayana v. State of A. P. (supra) was approved by a three-Judge Bench in Khujji @ Surendra Tiwari v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1991 SC 1853 and it was held that the testimony of eye-witnesses could not be discarded on the ground that their names did not figure in the inquest report prepared at the earliest point of time. The nature and purpose of inquest held under section 174 Cr. P. C. was also explained in the case of Amur Singh v. Bal-winder Singh. 2003 (46) ACC 619 (SC) = 2003 (4) AIC 580. 38. Thus it is well settled by a catena of decisions of the Honble Apex Court that the purpose of holding an inquest is very limited, viz. P. C. was also explained in the case of Amur Singh v. Bal-winder Singh. 2003 (46) ACC 619 (SC) = 2003 (4) AIC 580. 38. Thus it is well settled by a catena of decisions of the Honble Apex Court that the purpose of holding an inquest is very limited, viz. , to ascertain as to whether a person has committed suicide or has been killed by another or by an animal or by ma chinery or by an accident or has died under circumstances raising a reasonable suspi cion that some other person has committed an offence. There is absolutely no require ment in law of mentioning the details of the FIR, names of the accused or the names of the eye- witnesses or the gist of their state ment nor it is required to be signed by any eye-witnesses. 39. Therefore, in view of the law laid down by the Honble Apex Court in the cases mentioned herein- above, due to non-mentioning the names of the accused per sons in inquest report Ext. Ka 4, it cannot be inferred that murder of the deceased was not committed by the appellants. 40. Drawing our attention towards the statement of D. W. 2 Saqueena, it was submitted by learned Counsel for the ap pellants that the motive of committing the murder of deceased Raunaq by the accused persons as alleged in the statement of P. W. 7 Aziz is falsified. The learned Trial Court giving sound reasons has concluded that the woman who was examined in the name of Saqueena as D. W. 2 cannot be the wife of deceased Raunaq and some imposter has been examined in the name of Saqeena showing her to be the wife of deceased. We agree with the findings of learned Trial Court recorded in 6 this regard in the im pugned judgment. D. W. 2 Saqueena was examined in Trial Court on 22. 3. 1982. In her cross-examination, she has stated that Raunaq had died in the house of her mother, but she did not go to the house of her mother at the time of death of Raunaq. It is further stated by D. W. 2 that after the death of Raunaq she did not try to know as to how, when and where Raunaq died. It is further stated by D. W. 2 that after the death of Raunaq she did not try to know as to how, when and where Raunaq died. This shows that the woman who has been exam ined in the name of Saqueena as D. W. 2 cannot be the wife of deceased Raunaq, because it is not believable that on hearing about the death of her husband, the wife of deceased would not go to her maiyaka to see the dead body of her husband. On the basis of the age as stated by D. W. 2 in her statement and keeping in view other fac tors, the learned Trial Court has rightly concluded that the woman, who was exam ined by the accused persons in the name of Saqueena as D. W. 2 is not the wife of de ceased Raunaq. Therefore, on the basis of the statement of D. W. 2 Saqeena, the mo tive as alleged by P. W. 7 Aziz for commit ting the murder of his son Raunaq by the accused persons is not falsified. 41. It was further contended by learned Counsel for the appellants that the torches in the light of which P. W. 3 Ram Pal Singh and P. W. 5 Ahmad Husain are said to have witnessed the incident were not produced in Trial Court, which is fatal to the prosecution. It is true that the witnesses Ram Pal Singh and Ahmad Husain had not brought their torches in Trial Court at the time of their examination, but on this ground it cannot be said that these wit nesses were not having torches at the time of incident. The torches of both these wit nesses were seen by the Investigating Offi cer S. I. Iqbal Ahmad Zaidi and after giving the torches in their supurdgi, fard supurdaginama Ext. Ka 7 was prepared which has been proved by him (P. W. 6) in Trial Court at the time of his examination. There fore, availability of light is not rendered doubtful merely due to non production of torches in Trial Court by the witnesses Ram Pal Singh and Ahmad Husain. The accused persons were previously known to these witnesses. Known persons can be recog nised in the night even in the light of stars. There fore, availability of light is not rendered doubtful merely due to non production of torches in Trial Court by the witnesses Ram Pal Singh and Ahmad Husain. The accused persons were previously known to these witnesses. Known persons can be recog nised in the night even in the light of stars. Therefore, in our opinion non production of torches by the witnesses Ram Pal Singh and Ahmad Husain in Trial Court is not fatal to the prosecution. 42. No other point worth mentioning was urged before us by the parties Counsel. 43. For the reasons mentioned herein-above, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has successfully brought home the charges to the accused persons. There is no scope to make any in terference in the impugned judgment, as it does not suffer from any legal infirmity. 44. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. The conviction and sentence re corded by the Trial Court against the ac cused-appellants Iliyas and Ali Husain are affirmed. They are on bail. They shall be taken 7 into custody by the Trial Court con cerned and sent to jail to serve out the re maining sentence. After sending the ac cused-appellants to jail, their sureties and surety bonds shall stand discharged. The appeal stands abated against the accused-appellants Smt. Sharifan and Kal loo due to their death. The office is directed to return Trial Court record expeditiously along-with a copy of this judgment for necessary ac tion. Compliance report be sent by the Trial Court concerned within two months. Appeal Dismissed. .