JUDGMENT Ranjan Gogoi, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 7.8.2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nagaon, in Sessions Case No. 204(N) of 2001. By the aforesaid judgment and order the accused/appellant has been convicted under Section 302, IPC and has been sentenced, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life. A fine of Rs. 2,000, in default, to suffer R.I. for six months more has also been imposed. 2. The short case of the prosecution is that on 27.12.2000 at about 9.30 a.m. one Pradip Mohan, Manager, Burrapahar Tea Estate, lodged a FIR in the Bagori Police Outpost under Jakhalabondha Police Station alleging that he has been informed by the Unit Secretary and President of the Assam Chah Mazdoor Sangha, Burrapahar Tea Estate, that the accused/appellant had killed one old couple, namely, Etuwa Goala and Raiboti Goala at about 2.30 p.m. of 26.12.2000. On the basis of the aforesaid FIR lodged a G.D. Entry (No. 344) was recorded in the General Diary of the Bagari Outpost and the FIR was forwarded to the Jakhalabondha Police Station for registration of a case. Thereafter, Jakhalabondha PS. Case No. 105/2000 under Section 302, IPC was registered. PW6, Sri Bhabendra Nath Kalita, S.I. of police was entrusted with the investigation of the case. The Investigating Officer along with the police party proceeded to the place of occurrence, prepared a sketch map and examined witnesses whose statements were recorded under Section 161, Cr.PC. Inquest was held and the dead bodies were sent for post mortem examination. On receipt of the report of post mortem and on completion of investigation charge sheet was filed against the accused/appellant under Section 302, IPC. The offence being exclusively triable by the court of Sessions, the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Kaliabor, by order dated 28.8.2001, committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions at Nagaon. In the Sessions Court charge was framed under Section 302, IPC against the accused/appellant who pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. In the trial held six witnesses were examined by the prosecution and two more witnesses were examined as court witnesses. The defence did not adduce any evidence. However, the statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313, Cr.PC. Thereafter, at the conclusion of the trial, the accused/appellant has been convicted and sentenced, as aforesaid, giving rise to the present appeal. 3. The defence did not adduce any evidence. However, the statement of the accused/appellant was recorded under Section 313, Cr.PC. Thereafter, at the conclusion of the trial, the accused/appellant has been convicted and sentenced, as aforesaid, giving rise to the present appeal. 3. At this stage, it will be necessary for the court to briefly notice the core of the evidence adduced by the prosecution witnesses in support of the charge. 4. PW1, Kanu Tanti, is the Secretary of the Burrapahar Tea Garden Labour Union. According to this witness, one Parameswar Madraji (CW1) had informed him of the incident thereafter this witness came to the house of Parameswar and found Raiboti lying dead in the courtyard of the house of Parameswar with cut injury on the neck. According to this witness, the deceased Etuwa was also lying with his neck cut. Thereafter, this witness informed the garden manager of the incident. PW1 has further deposed that he came across Bapon Majhi (CW2), i.e., husband of the accused/appellant, who informed him that it is his wife, i.e., the accused/appellant who had killed the (sic) with a dao. PW1 has further deposed that thereafter police arrived at the scene and the accused/appellant confessed her guilt before the police, handed over a dao from her house after telling the police and others present that she had kept the dao in her house after cleaning it. PW1 is also a witness to the seizure of the allegedly offending weapon and wearing apparels of the accused/appellant made by seizure list exhibited as Ext-1. In cross-examination this witness has been categorical in stating that it is only upon being intimidated by the police personnel present at the place of occurrence that the accused had delivered the dao and clothes from inside her house. 5. PW2, Naren Tanti, is the President of the Burrapahar Tea Garden Labour Union. According to this witness, on 26.12.2000 while he was returning home from duties PW1, Kanu Tanti, Secretary of the Labour Union, informed him of the incident. PW2 has deposed that he along with the Secretary, i.e., PW1 went to the residence of the Manager and reported to him about the incident whereafter the Manager wrote out the ejahar on a piece of paper and asked them to submit it to the police station. PW2 has deposed that he along with the Secretary, i.e., PW1 went to the residence of the Manager and reported to him about the incident whereafter the Manager wrote out the ejahar on a piece of paper and asked them to submit it to the police station. PW2 has also deposed that he found the deceased persons lying with cut injuries and bleeding from their wounds. He has also deposed that the accused/appellant had admitted that she had cut the old couple and on being asked by the police had taken out a naga dao from inside her house. In cross-examination this witness has stated that the naga dao produced by the accused/appellant before the police can be found in every household in the tea estate. 6. PWs 3 and 4 have been declared hostile by the prosecution. There is nothing in the evidence of the said witnesses which can be salvaged from the offending part so as to read anything in favour of the prosecution. 7. PW5, Dr. Brij Mohan Rai Khederia, had performed the post mortem of the deceased on 27.12.2000. The findings of the post mortem, as deposed to by PW5, may be set out below: Etuwa Goala: On examination I found the moth was closed. Rigor Mortis was present. On examination I found the following injuries: 1. Incised wound over the left side of the neck, vessel and muscle deep. Size 10 cm x 2 cm. Carotid vessels were incised. 2. Incised wound over the back of the neck, size 6 cm x 2 cm x bone deep. 3. Incised wound over the upper part of the back of the chest on left side. Size 10 cm x 2 cm x bone deep. 4. Incised wound over right side of the face and nose. Size 10 cm x 2 cm x bone deep. 5. Two incised wound over the dorsum of right hand. Size 3 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. 6. Incised wound over the anterior aspect of the right thigh, over the middle third region. Size 10 cm x 2 cm x muscle deep. Both lungs were congested. Heart - both sides were empty. Brain found to be contested. Stomach was empty. Intestine contained gas and faecal matters. Liver, spleen and kidney were congested. Bladder was empty. Other organs were healthy. Size 10 cm x 2 cm x muscle deep. Both lungs were congested. Heart - both sides were empty. Brain found to be contested. Stomach was empty. Intestine contained gas and faecal matters. Liver, spleen and kidney were congested. Bladder was empty. Other organs were healthy. All the wounds described were ante mortem and caused by sharp edged heavy weapon. In my opinion, death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of the wounds described. Raiboti Goala: On the same day and the same time, I did perform post mortem on the dead body of Raiboti Gowalla, w/o Etuwa Gowalla being identified by c/938 Kamal Bora and relative Motilal Kurua, female body and found that the rigor morties was present. Eyes were closed and the wounds were as follows: 1. Incised wound over the forehead size 14 cm x 3 cm x bone deep. 2. Incised wound over the root of the neck in between two sterno mastoid muscles. Neck and vessels were incised and trachea was incised. Larynx and treachea were contained blood. Treachea was cut in the upper part of the neck. Lungs were contested. Heart - both side empty. Brain and spinal cord were contested. Liver, spleen and kidneys were congested. Bladder was empty. All organs were healthy. All the wounds were ante mortem and caused by sharp cut heavy weapon. In my opinion, death was due to shock and hemorrhage following the wounds described. As the rigor mortis was present, it can be presumed that the injuries were inflicted within 24 hours. I did not mention the reason for coming to the inference. In the form date and arrival of the dead bodies is shown as 11.30 a.m. of both the dead bodies. I examined the dead bodies at 12.30 p.m. 8. PW6, Bhabendra Nath Kalita, is the Investigating Officer of the case, who, inter alia, deposed that the accused/appellant had produced a naga dao and certain wearing apparels before him which was seized by him by Ext-1. In Ext-1 it is mentioned that some of the wearing apparels produced by the accused had been washed recently. 9. CW1, Parameswar Madrasi, in his evidence has deposed that the dead body of Raiboti Goala was lying in front of his house when he had gone there on information being given by the security personnel of the tea estate. In Ext-1 it is mentioned that some of the wearing apparels produced by the accused had been washed recently. 9. CW1, Parameswar Madrasi, in his evidence has deposed that the dead body of Raiboti Goala was lying in front of his house when he had gone there on information being given by the security personnel of the tea estate. Thereafter, CW1 reported the incident to the office bearers of the Labour Union, i.e., PW1. In his cross-examination he has stated that he had not seen the person who had killed Raiboti. 10. CW2, Bapon Majhi, is the husband of the accused/appellant who in his deposition has denied that he had informed PW1 that it is his wife, i.e., the accused/appellant who had committed the offence. 11. The evidence of the prosecution noticed above makes it abundantly clear that there is no eye witness to the occurrence and the prosecution has sought to bring home the charge against the accused/appellant by means of circumstantial evidence. The law relating to proof of a criminal charge by circumstantial evidence has come to be fairly well settled and would not require any elaborate reiteration save and except the fact that not only the circumstances alleged against the accused must be proved by acceptable evidence, the said circumstances must also incriminate the accused and must be acceptable of forming a chain of events which unerringly point to only one direction namely it is the accused/appellant alone and nobody else who had committed the crime. The case of the prosecution, unfolded by the witnesses examined, therefore, will have to be tested on the aforesaid broad principles. 12. The alleged confession made by the accused/appellant before the police being hit by the provisions of Sections 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act will not be admissible in evidence to prove the said fact against the accused/appellant. The production of the dao and the wearing apparels of the accused/appellant by the accused/appellant herself before the police, in our considered view, would also suffer from a serious lacuna inasmuch as both PWs 1 and 2 have clearly deposed that such production was made by the accused/appellant on being intimidated by the police personnel. The production of the dao and the wearing apparels of the accused/appellant by the accused/appellant herself before the police, in our considered view, would also suffer from a serious lacuna inasmuch as both PWs 1 and 2 have clearly deposed that such production was made by the accused/appellant on being intimidated by the police personnel. Even if the production of the dao and the wearing apparels is to be accepted as an established fact there is nothing on record to establish the necessary link between the use of the dao and the alleged offence or that the accused/appellant was wearing the clothes at the time of occurrence, which were produced by her before the police and were subsequently seized by Ext-1. The seizure-list (Ext-1) reveals that no bloodstains were found in the dao at the time of seizure of the same. The prosecution has sought to explain the above with reference to the evidence of PW1 that the accused had admitted that she had cleaned the dao by washing it. The aforesaid, statement attributed to the accused/appellant by PW1, however, was made in the course of her confessional statement before the police which, as already held by us, is hit by Sections 25 and 26 of the Evidence Act. There had been no independent attempt on the part of the prosecution to have the dao analysed by the experts to find out traces of human blood thereon. Insofar as the wearing apparels of the accused/appellant is concerned, the prosecution case is that from the seizure-list (Ext-1) it is clear that the said wearing apparels were washed after the incident. The above version of the case has been narrated only by the Investigating Officer and not by any other witness. In such a situation, the sole version of the Investigating Officer in this regard will be of doubtful credibility particularly in the absence of any attempt by the prosecution to have the said clothes examined by the experts for traces of human blood. In such a situation, the sole version of the Investigating Officer in this regard will be of doubtful credibility particularly in the absence of any attempt by the prosecution to have the said clothes examined by the experts for traces of human blood. The circumstances sought to be proved by the prosecution against the accused/appellant, therefore, cannot be said to have been established by clear, cogent and acceptable evidence so as to enable us to examine as to whether the said circumstances which incriminate the accused/appellant and reasonably form a chain of events pointing to the only direction that is required, i.e., it is the accused/appellant and nobody else who had committed the offence. 13. For the aforesaid reasons we are of the view that the impugned judgment and order of conviction and the sentence imposed on the accused/appellant is legally infirm and not tenable. We accordingly set aside the judgment and order dated 7.8.2003 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nagaon in Sessions Case No. 204(N)/2001 and acquit the accused/appellant of the offence alleged. We direct the accused/appellant to be set at liberty forthwith. The appeal, consequently is allowed. 14. We had appointed Smt. Anupama Devi as the amicus curiae in the case. However, after such engagement was made by the court, the accused/appellant had engaged her own counsels. The learned amicus curiae had prepared the case and had participated in the hearing. We, therefore, acknowledge the assistance rendered by the learned amicus curiae and direct that two days fee at the rate of Rs. 2,500 per diem be paid to the learned amicus curiae. 15. Send back the L.C.R. Appeal allowed