Inderjit Singh, J.;— The present appeal has been filed by the appellant against the judgment/order dated 19.07.2008, passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Jalandhar, whereby he was convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of ` 5,000/- under Section 302 IPC and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. He was also convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 323 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that FIR in the present case has been registered on the basis of statement of Mohan Singh, complainant, who mainly stated that he and his another brother Sohan Singh are unmarried and residing with family of another brother Resham Singh. Their fourth brother Gurmeet Singh is residing separately at Jalandhar with his children. Resham Singh has two sons namely Sarabjit Singh and Satnam Singh and both are married. Sarabjit Singh has gone to Saudi Arabia for the last about six months and Satnam Singh has gone to England for the last about five years. The land of the complainant and his uncle's son Jarnail Singh is towards the side of the field of Baba Munsha Singh Kutia Sant Gurudwarawale, where rooms of complainant and Jarnail Singh are adjacent and built for the purpose of tethering cattle. The complainant and his uncle's son Jarnail Singh after taking meals use to go to sleep in their respective rooms. On 13.04.2006, as per routine, he and Jarnail Singh after taking meals at the house in the village went to sleep in their respective rooms in the fields. Then at about 3/4.00 A.M. when granthi has started reciting paath in the Gurudwara, complainant got up and switched on the bulb. Then accused Balbir Singh holding a baseball bat entered in his room and gave blow on his right leg below the knee on front side and two blows on his back on the shoulders and a thrust blow on his chest in right side. Jarnail Singh, who was also known as Fauji as he has served in the military and later in home guard police, was sleeping in the adjacent room. The complainant went running towards the Fauji's room raising alarm. The accused chased him. Jarnail Singh, who was also known as Fauji as he has served in the military and later in home guard police, was sleeping in the adjacent room. The complainant went running towards the Fauji's room raising alarm. The accused chased him. When Jarnail Singh tried to stand up then accused Balbir Singh gave blow from that very bat on the left temple of Jarnail Singh. The complainant out of fear hide himself in the heap of straw and when Balbir Singh left and after considerable time he went to the room of Jarnail Singh, he saw that his legs were lying on the cot and mouth was lying on the heap of sand lying near the cot. He had died as a result of injury inflicted on his head. In the meantime, his elder brother Resham Singh came to the field. He told the entire story to him and then Resham Singh went to the village and told the Panchayat and at the house of Jarnail Singh upon which Sandeep Singh son of Jarnail Singh along with Panchayat and Resham Singh came to the spot and after leaving some persons of Panchayat at the spot, complainant along with Resham Singh, Sandeep Singh, Sarpanch and Nachatar Singh, Panch was going to inform the police and the police met them and the statement of complainant was recorded by SI Piara Singh, SHO, P.S. Shahkot at 10.15 A.M. The motive behind the occurrence was that Amarjit Kaur wife of Sarabjit Singh had illicit relations with Balbir Singh and he used to come to their house at odd hours. The complainant, Jarnail Singh and Resham Singh used to prevent Balbir Singh from coming to the house and due to that grudge he inflicted injuries to the complainant and his uncle's son Jarnail Singh, who has been murdered. After recording the statement, ruqa was sent to the police station on the basis of which FIR has been registered. Then, the Investigating Officer along with ASI Nachattar Singh reached the place of occurrence where dead body of Jarnail Singh was lying. He conducted the inquest proceedings on the dead body. Blood-stained earth was taken into police possession after preparing sealed parcel. Rough site plan was prepared. Dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. Statement of witnesses were recorded. Accused Balbir Singh was arrested on 16.04.2006. He conducted the inquest proceedings on the dead body. Blood-stained earth was taken into police possession after preparing sealed parcel. Rough site plan was prepared. Dead body was sent for post-mortem examination. Statement of witnesses were recorded. Accused Balbir Singh was arrested on 16.04.2006. The Investigating Officer interrogated Balbir Singh on 18.04.2006, who made disclosure statement and got recovered baseball bat in pursuance of his disclosure statement, which was taken into police possession. After the receipt of report from chemical examiner and after necessary investigation, challan was presented against the accused-appellant. Finding prima facie case, the appellant was chargesheeted under Sections 302 and 323 IPC, to which the appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. In support of its case, the prosecution examined PW-1 Dr.Sunil Verma, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Nakodar, who conducted post mortem examination on the dead body of Jarnail Singh on 15.04.2006 and found following injuries. “1. Lacerated wound 6 x 4 cm on the left side of forehead. Underlying bone full of blood. Brain matter full of blood. 2. Lacerated wound 2 x 3 cm on the right eye brow underlying bone fractured. Brain matter full of blood.” In his opinion, the cause of death in this case is neurogenic and haemorrhage shock due to the injury on head which was sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Scalp was fractured at various places. The time between injury and death was within few minutes and time between death and post mortem was within twelve hours. PW-2 Mohan Singh, who is complainant and injured eye witness, has mainly deposed as per prosecution version. PW-3 Resham Singh, brother of the complainant, also deposed as per prosecution version. PW-4 Head Constable Bhupinder Singh, mainly deposed regarding getting conducted post mortem on the dead body of Jarnail Singh. PW-5 SI Nachattar Singh, who joined investigation deposed regarding investigation. PW-6 Balwinder Singh, Patwari mainly deposed regarding preparing of Shajra Aks after consulting revenue records. PW-6 Inspector Piara Singh (again marked as PW- 6) is the Investigating Officer, who mainly deposed regarding the investigation of the case. PW-7 Dr.Vijay Kumar, Medical Officer, mainly deposed regarding medico legal examination of Mohan Singh, complainant on 14.04.2006 and found following injuries:- “1. A bluish bruise mark 3½ x ½ cm on the anterior aspect of right leg. PW-6 Inspector Piara Singh (again marked as PW- 6) is the Investigating Officer, who mainly deposed regarding the investigation of the case. PW-7 Dr.Vijay Kumar, Medical Officer, mainly deposed regarding medico legal examination of Mohan Singh, complainant on 14.04.2006 and found following injuries:- “1. A bluish bruise mark 3½ x ½ cm on the anterior aspect of right leg. 11 cm above ankle joint with lacerated wound of the size of 2½ x ¼ cm over the bruise. 2. A bluish swelling was found present around the bridge of nose. 3. Injured complained of pain on the left scapular region of throat and front of right side of chest without there being any mark of external injury.” He also proved medico legal reports Ex.PS and the pictorial diagram Ex.PS/1. At the close of the evidence, the accused-appellant was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and confronted with the evidence and the accused-appellant denied the correctness of the evidence and pleaded himself as innocent. On the basis of the evidence produced by the prosecution, accused-appellant Balbir Singh alias Balbira was convicted and sentenced as stated above. This appeal has been filed by the accused through Ms.Tanu Bedi, Advocate, Legal Aid Counsel. She submitted that the brief of the appeal has already been returned to the Punjab State Legal Services Authority. No one is appearing on behalf of the appellant. In view of the aforesaid facts, when we requested Mr.Vinod Ghai, Senior Advocate, who is present in court, to argue this appeal on behalf of the appellant, he happily accepted our request. At the time of argument, learned counsel for the appellant contended that there was no motive for causing the occurrence and motive is also not proved as Amarjit Kaur was not associated in the investigation by the Investigating Officer. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that there is delay in recording the FIR as the occurrence took place at 3/4.00 A.M. and the statement was recorded at 10.15 A.M., which creates a doubt in the prosecution version. Learned counsel for the appellant further contended that there is delay in recording the FIR as the occurrence took place at 3/4.00 A.M. and the statement was recorded at 10.15 A.M., which creates a doubt in the prosecution version. He argued that it seems that the death has taken place earlier as some deserted food was found and as per FIR the complainant use to take food at house and then go to the cattle field at about 8.00 P.M. He further contended that as per PW-7 Dr.Vijay Kumar, the injuries caused to Mohan Singh were within 24 hours, which also shows that this occurrence might have taken place in the midnight. Learned counsel for the appellant next contended that conduct of PW-2 Mohan Singh also creates reasonable doubt in the prosecution version as he himself has not got examined at the earliest, rather he was medico legally examined in the evening. His conduct that he hide himself at the time of occurrence also does not look natural. He further contended that there is discrepancy regarding the length of the dead body as in the post mortem report, it was shown as 5'-10” whereas in the inquest report the length of body was given as 5'-6”. There are also cuttings in the post mortem report, which also creates doubt in the prosecution version. Therefore, he argued that appeal should be accepted. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State has argued that the case of the prosecution has been duly proved by the statement of PW-2 Mohan Singh, who himself got injured and is eye witness to the occurrence. His statement has been duly supported and corroborated by the medical evidence. The recovery of baseball bat by the accused in pursuance of his disclosure statement and the report of FSL that the baseball bat was blood-stained further supports and corroborates the prosecution version. She further argued that there are no material discrepancies in the statements nor PWs have made any material improvements. She, therefore, argued that the appeal should be dismissed having no merit. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance, have gone through the evidence on record minutely and very carefully. She further argued that there are no material discrepancies in the statements nor PWs have made any material improvements. She, therefore, argued that the appeal should be dismissed having no merit. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and with their assistance, have gone through the evidence on record minutely and very carefully. As regarding the first contention of the learned counsel for the appellant, we find no merit in the contention as the PW-2 Mohan Singh and PW-3 Resham Singh have specifically deposed that accused was working as a labourer with Resham Singh and had developed illicit relations with Amarjit Kaur, daughter-in-law of Resham Singh and they tried their best to prevent him from coming to their house and that was the reason for causing injuries to Mohan Singh, complainant and to commit murder of Jarnail Singh. In view of the statements of these witnesses, motive has been duly proved. There cannot be any documentary evidence regarding motive in the present case. It is also not possible that this matter might have been brought to the notice of Panchayat etc. because the honour of the family is also to be saved. The mere fact that Amarjit Kaur was not associated in the investigation does not create any doubt in the prosecution version as no purpose would have been solved by joining her in the investigation. As regarding the second contention regarding delay in the FIR, we find that though there is delay of about six hours in recording the statement of the complainant, but PW-2 Mohan Singh has given cogent explanation that out of fear complainant hide himself. There is every possibility that accused might have caused injuries to Mohan Singh, if he would not have hide himself. Otherwise also, the delay in itself is not fatal to the prosecution case. The only precaution in the case of delay is to be taken by the court is to scrutinize the evidence cautiously and carefully and we have gone through the evidence more cautiously and carefully in the present case. There is no evidence on record to show that the occurrence had taken place in the midnight etc. Finding of some un-digestive food from the post mortem alone is not sufficient to conclude that occurrence took place at midnight. There is no evidence on record to show that the occurrence had taken place in the midnight etc. Finding of some un-digestive food from the post mortem alone is not sufficient to conclude that occurrence took place at midnight. No question was asked to the doctor who conducted the post mortem regarding the time, whether the occurrence could have been taken place at midnight. Therefore, this fact also does not create any doubt in the prosecution version. Again, it is in the evidence that the complainant along with Jarnail Singh went to sleep in the cattle shed but nowhere time has been given in the FIR that when they have taken the meal. As a usual routine they use to take the meal at 8.00 P.M. but when crossexamined, PW-2 Mohan Singh has stated that they have taken the meal at 10.00 P.M. Therefore, this fact itself does not create any doubt in the prosecution version and the argument of the learned counsel for the appellant on this point also has no merit. The mere fact that the doctor has stated that injuries caused to PW-2 Mohan Singh were within 24 hours, also in no way proves that the occurrence had taken place in the midnight etc. As regarding next contention, we find nothing unnatural in the conduct of PW-2 Mohan Singh as Mohan Singh had not received serious injuries. There was only one lacerated wound on the ankle and other two injuries were only swelling, bruise and pain. It is also in the evidence that the police investigated the case that day till afternoon. Therefore, there may be delay in getting his injuries medico legally examined. Again, his conduct that he hide himself out of fear rather looks natural. As regarding the discrepancy and cuttings in the post mortem report, we find that it is not a material discrepancy which may go to the root of the case nor create any doubt in the prosecution version. Therefore, this contention of the learned counsel for the appellant has not merit. From the evidence on record, we find that PW-2 Mohan Singh, complainant has received the injuries in the occurrence and has seen the occurrence. There is no cross-examination of PW-7 Dr.Vijay Kumar that these injuries can be self-suffered etc. nor there is any suggestion to PW-2 Mohan Singh that these injuries were selfsuffered. From the evidence on record, we find that PW-2 Mohan Singh, complainant has received the injuries in the occurrence and has seen the occurrence. There is no cross-examination of PW-7 Dr.Vijay Kumar that these injuries can be self-suffered etc. nor there is any suggestion to PW-2 Mohan Singh that these injuries were selfsuffered. There is no cross-examination to PW-4 Head Constable Bhupinder Singh who got conducted the post-mortem on the dead body nor there is any cross-examination of PW-1 Dr.Sunil Verma regarding the cutting on the post mortem report. Otherwise also, these facts did not create any doubt in the prosecution version. The oral statement of PW-2 Mohan Singh is supported by statement of PW-3 Resham Singh. There is motive for causing occurrence. PWs have consistently deposed regarding prosecution version. There are no material contradictions nor there are material improvements in the prosecution version. The witnesses are trustworthy and reliable witnesses. The statement of PW-2 Mohan Singh is duly supported by medical evidence. Further, recovery of baseball bat in pursuance of the disclosure statement of the accused, also supports and corroborates the prosecution version. The report of FSL that baseball bat was blood-stained further supports and corroborates the prosecution version. The suggestion given to the PWs that the accused was falsely implicated for non-payment of wages etc. cannot be believed. Therefore, from the above, we find no merit in the appeal. For the reasons recorded above, conviction and sentence by the trial court, is upheld and the Criminal Appeal No.D-652-DB of 2008 is dismissed. As Balbir Singh alias Balbira is on bail, his bail bonds stand cancelled and he is directed to surrender himself before the jail authorities immediately for completing remainder of sentence, failing which the concerned authority shall proceed against him in accordance with law.