JUDGMENT : A.S. Naidu, J. - The judgment dated 22nd March, 1996 passed by learned District and Sessions Judge, Ganjam-Gajapati, Berhampur acquitting the accused persons from the charges u/s 302/ 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code in S.C. No. 422/1995 is assailed by the State of Orissa in this Government Appeal. 2. The criminal action was set to motion on the basis of an F.I.R. filed on 26.7.1995 at Golanthara Police Station alleging commission of offences under Sections 302/201 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.. It is alleged that Dandasi Behera is the husband of Paradesi Behera. They are resident of village Jugudi under Golantahra Police Station. Kanhei Sahu was the co-villager and was also the Sarpanch of Siala Grama Panchayat. On 26.7.1995 at about 7.30 A.M. Udaya Chandra Sahu (P.W.1) lodged the F.I.R. alleging that in the night of 24.7.1995 Kanhei Sahu took his meal and left the house and did not return thereafter. On the following day, the family members searched for him, but in vain. It was learnt that Kanhei Sahu after leaving his house went to the betel shop of Magi Sahu (P.W.4) and took some mixture and went away. Thereafter his whereabouts were not known. In the morning of 26.7.1995, P.W.2 found a dead body kept in a gunny bag, floating in the "Mathatota Pond" and intimated the said fact to the informant. The informant went to the pond and identified the dead body to be that of Kanhei Sahu and rushed to the Golanthara Police Station and submitted the F.I.R. before P.W.11, the O.I.C. of the said Police Station. 3. On the basis of such report investigation commenced. In course of investigation the O.I.C. visited the spot, sent requisition for police dog and scientific team, held inquest over the dead body and sent the same for post mortem examination. The police dog took smell from the dead body and went to the house of Kanhei Sahu (deceased) thereafter tracing the smell of a chapal, the dog proceeded towards the pump house of the accused persons and caught hold of them. It was found that the floor of the house of the accused persons had been washed thoroughly by using cow-dung but sprinkles of blood stains were noticed on the walls of the room. A "Kantha" was also found which was stained with blood. P.W.11 seized the same. It was found that the floor of the house of the accused persons had been washed thoroughly by using cow-dung but sprinkles of blood stains were noticed on the walls of the room. A "Kantha" was also found which was stained with blood. P.W.11 seized the same. While the accused persons were in police custody, they gave recovery of one "Kati" with iron handle said to have been used for committing the offence. The same was stained with blood. Another "Hemadasta Pua" stained with blood was also seized. It is stated that accused Dandasi while in police custody made a statement and led the I.O. and the witnesses to the Pump House and gave recovery of the "Kati", two pillows, one saree, one lungi, one cloth bag and two torn clothes, all stained with blood; which were seized by-the I.O. The scientific team collected cement wall scraping, stained with blood each from the house of the accused persons. Thereafter the I.O. arrested both the accused persons and forwarded them to Court and were remanded to custody. 4. After completion of investigation charge sheet was submitted in G.R. Case No. 573/1995 of the Court of learned S.D.J.M., Berhampur. After perusing the charge sheet and on being satisfied, the said Court took cognizance of the offence and committed the said case to the Court of Session for trial. 5. In course of trial both the accused persons pleaded not guilty. The plea of the accused was of complete denial. 6. The prosecution in order to substantiate its case, got examined eleven witnesses. Out of them, P.W.1 (the informant) was the nephew of Kanhei Sahu (deceased), P.Ws. 2, 3, 4 and 5 were the co-villagers of the deceased, P.W.6 was the Medical Officer, who conducted autopsy over the dead body, P.W.7 was a constable, who took the dead body for post mortem examination, P.W.8 was the Circle Inspector of Police, who had conducted preliminary investigation and submitted charge sheet, P.W.9 was the S.I. of Police, Dog Squad, Berhampur and led the dog during investigation, P.W.10 was the Laboratory Assistant, District Forensic Science Laboratory, Chatrapur and P.W.11 was the O.I.C. of Golanthara Police Station, who had investigated into the case. 7. From the evidence of P.W.6, the doctor who conducted post mortem, it appears that the deceased had sustained as many as thirteen external injuries corresponding to eight internal injuries. 7. From the evidence of P.W.6, the doctor who conducted post mortem, it appears that the deceased had sustained as many as thirteen external injuries corresponding to eight internal injuries. According to him, all the injuries were ante-mortem in nature and were caused by moderately heavy sharp cutting weapons. The death was opined to be homicidal in nature. Learned District and Sessions Judge after examining the evidence threadbare and on the basis of the postmortem report and other materials available, arrived at a conclusion that the death was homicidal in nature. After examining the evidence once again, we find no reason to interfere with the said findings. 8. It is a case where no direct evidence is available and the prosecution totally rests on circumstantial evidence P.Ws. 1 and 3 are the two nephews of the deceased. They found that the dead body was kept inside a gunny bag floating in the water. Perusal of their evidence reveals that they have not uttered a single word against the accused persons. P.W.1 was the informant, who had no direct knowledge and filed the F.I.R on the basis of the information given to him. P.W.2 was a witness to the inquest. P.W.5 was a witness to the seizure and has not spoken anything against the accused. The report of chemical examination submitted by R.F.S.L. Berhampur vide Ext.20 reveals that blood stains were of human blood and were available in the articles which were sent. The prosecution mostly based on the detection made by the dog. According to the prosecution the police dog named "Bindu" caught hold of the accused Dandasi, but then perusal of Ext. 14, the report submitted by the S.I. of dog squad reveals that no such fact was narrated therein. Thus, learned District and Sessions Judge had rightly disbelieved the statement made in Court that "Bindu" caught hold of the accused Dandasi. Even otherwise, the detection made through dog is only a piece of evidence which needs to be corroborated by other relevant and cogent evidence so as to form a basis to convict the accused persons. 9. After discussing the evidence, learned District and Sessions Judge arrived at a conclusion that neither there was any circumstantial evidence nor any positive evidence adduced to implicate the accused persons with the commission of the crime. 9. After discussing the evidence, learned District and Sessions Judge arrived at a conclusion that neither there was any circumstantial evidence nor any positive evidence adduced to implicate the accused persons with the commission of the crime. After going through the evidence once again, we find that the reasons given by learned District and Sessions Judge are just and proper and the conclusion arrived at does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. 10. In view of the aforesaid, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of acquittal that too after lapse of fourteen years. Accordingly, the Government Appeal stands dismissed. S.C. Parija, J. 11. I agree. Final Result : Dismissed