Anil Kumar Sharma, J. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 8.10.1999, passed by Sessions Judge, Mahoba in S.T. No. 56 of 1998, whereby the appellants have been found guilty for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 I.P.C. and each appellant had been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. 2. The facts germane to the appeal are that on 25.11.1997 at about 2.30 p.m. complainant Halkai son of Matole Yadav resident of Budi Bachhechhar, P.S. Kul Pahar submitted his written report in P.S. Ajnar stating that his daughter Ram Kunwar was married with Karan Singh son of Chandan Singh Yadav, rersident of village Arghat Mau. His son-in-law Karan Singh has obtained a patta of the land near Khojo Kua and got his land measured about a year ago. On measuring the land it was found that about five Hath land was in the field of accused-appellants, who wanted to take lease land from his son-in-law, but he did not accede. In order to resolve the dispute a Panchayat was called for 25.11.1997 in which complainant, Kishori Chaube son of Chhiddoo and Prabhu Dayal Tiwari son of Mahadeo residents of village Arghat Mau and others were assembling. At about 11.30 a.m. Shiv Singh, brother of Dhuram Yadav started ploughing the land of his son-in-law. His daughter Ram Kunwar and son-in-law protested, whereupon Dhuram, Shiv Singh and younger brother Raman Singh alias Kuttu in order to kill started assaulting them with axe. The complainant and others tried to save them, but the accused persons killed both of them at the field. After the incident the accused persons waving the axes made their escape good. On the basis of this report case at crime no. 135 of 1997 under section 302 IPC was registered at the police station, investigation whereof was entrusted to S.I. Om Prakash Dwivedi. After copying the check report and G.D. in the case diary, he interrogated constable Prabhat Kumar and the complainant at the police station and proceeded for the spot. He conducted the inquest upon the dead bodies of both the deceased and along with the usual papers sent them for post mortem examination. Thereafter he interrogated witnesses Prabhu Dayal Tiwari and Kishori Lal and prepared site plan. He conducted the inquest upon the dead bodies of both the deceased and along with the usual papers sent them for post mortem examination. Thereafter he interrogated witnesses Prabhu Dayal Tiwari and Kishori Lal and prepared site plan. He seized the plain and blood stained earth, as also the broken bangles of Smt. Ram Kunwar from the place where the dead bodies of the deceased were found through memo Ex. Ka-15. 3. Dr. P.S. Sagar conducted the autopsy upon the cadaver of both the deceased and has noted in his autopsy notes as under: Deceased Smt. Ram Kunwar on 26.11.1997 at 3.00 p.m. Dead body of adult female average height and built, eyes closed, mouth was semi-closed, abdomen distended. Rigor mortis absent in upper limbs and present in knee joint and ankle joint. Ante mortem injuries Incised wound size 8 x 3 ½ cm lower part of neck at anterior aspect 3 cm below from cervical vertebrae hyoid bone. Fractured 4th cervical vertebrae. In the internal examination the doctor found that fourth cervical vertebrae of the deceased was fractured. Both lungs were pale. One litre pasty food material was found in the stomach. Small and large intestines contained gases and faeces matters. In the opinion of the doctor the deceased suffered death on account of shock and hemorrhage due to ante mortem injury. Deceased Karan Singh - 26.11.1997 at 4.00 p.m. Dead body of adult male of average height and built. Eyes open, mouth closed. Abdomen distended. Rigor mortis absent in Neck & upper limbs and are present in knee and ankle joint. Ante mortem injuries 1. Incised wound size 10 x 3 ½ cm lower part of neck at posterior aspect 7 cm below from occipital emenance transversely placed tailing on right side depth bone deep. 2. Incised wound 8 x 3 cm x bone deep over tip of right shoulder vertically placed tailing on forward. 3. Incised wound 6 x 2 cm on right scapular region into bone deep vertically placed tailing on downward. 4. Incised wound 3 x 1 cm left hand middle finger vertically placed tailing downward depth bone deep. 5. Incised wound size 4 x 1 cm x bone deep at occipital eminence transversely placed tailing on right side. In the internal examination Dr. Sagar found that second and third cervical vertebrae were fractured. 4. Incised wound 3 x 1 cm left hand middle finger vertically placed tailing downward depth bone deep. 5. Incised wound size 4 x 1 cm x bone deep at occipital eminence transversely placed tailing on right side. In the internal examination Dr. Sagar found that second and third cervical vertebrae were fractured. Both lungs were pale, one litre pasty food material was found in the stomach, small and large intestines contained gases and faeces. In the opinion of the doctor the deceased suffered death on account of shock and hemorrhage due to ante mortem injuries. 4. On 26.11.1997, the investigation of the case was taken up by S.O. Ran Bahadur Singh. The same day at about 6.00 p.m., he arrested accused Dhuram, and Shiv Singh @ Munna from Akaumi-Bela Tal Road. On interrogation they had allegedly confessed the guilt and assured to get axes recovered. On this assurance the investigating officer procured witness Rajjoo and accused persons took the police on the road leading to village Hat and from the Kotha of bamboos, they took out the axes and said that with these weapons they had killed both the deceased. Blood stains were found on the blades of the recovered axes, memo was prepared and axes were sealed through memo Ext. Ka-18. The investigating officer thereafter interrogated the formal witnesses and alleged eye witnesses Rani and Kranti, minor daughters of both the deceased and after completing the investigation submitted charge sheet. The case property was sent for examination to Forensic Science Laboratory and its report is Ext. Ka-21. 5. After committal of the case to the Court of Session, charge for the offence punishable under section 302/34 I.P.C. was framed against all the three accused-appellants, who abjured the guilt and claimed trial. 6. In order to prove the charges the prosecution examined complainant Harkai PW-1, Prabhu Dayal PW-2, Km. Kranti PW-3, Km. Rani alias Kiran PW-4, S.I. O.P. Dwivedi PW-5, Kishori PW-6, Dr. P.S. Sagar PW-7 and S.I. Ran Bahadur Singh PW-8 7. All the three accused-appellants in their separate statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. have denied the entire prosecution story. However, they have not adduced any evidence in their defence. 8. After hearing counsel for the parties, learned Sessions Judge vide impugned judgment and order had convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants as indicated in para-1 of the judgment. Aggrieved the appellants have come up in the appeal. 9. However, they have not adduced any evidence in their defence. 8. After hearing counsel for the parties, learned Sessions Judge vide impugned judgment and order had convicted and sentenced the accused-appellants as indicated in para-1 of the judgment. Aggrieved the appellants have come up in the appeal. 9. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants and learned AGA for the State and perused the original record of the case carefully. 10. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued the following points before us : 1.That there was no motive for the accused to commit murder of both the deceased; 2.That the prosecution has examined interested and partisan witnesses and the independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution story; 3.That the names of PW-3 and PW-4 were not mentioned in the FIR; 4.That the prosecution could not prove the place of occurrence; 5.That there are material contradictions in the testimony of the prosecution witnesses; 6.That the ocular evidence does not find corroboration from the medical evidence. 11. Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that it is a broad day light double murder case in which the alleged incident took place on 25.11.1997 at 11.30 a.m. and its report was promptly lodged by the complainant the same day at about 2.30 p.m. with the police; that PW-2 and PW-6 have been won over by the defence and has not supported the prosecution story, but from his statement the date, time and place of the incident is proved and there is no discrepancy in the eye witness account of the incident with medical evidence. 12. The complainant is father-in-law of the deceased Karan Singh. He is resident of village Badi Bachhechhar, P.S. Kul Pahar, while the incident took place in village Arghat Mau, P.S. Ajnar, District Mahoba and the distance between the two villages is about 1½ kilometers. The written report scribed by Nathoo Ram had been submitted by the complainant at 2.30 p.m. on 25.11.1997. 13. The distance between the place of incident and police station, as per the check report Ext. Ka-2 is 12 kilometers. The complainant is the eye witness of the incident. He has noted in his written report that there was property dispute between the accused and the deceased and on the day of incident a Panchayat was convened and he has come to participate therein. Ka-2 is 12 kilometers. The complainant is the eye witness of the incident. He has noted in his written report that there was property dispute between the accused and the deceased and on the day of incident a Panchayat was convened and he has come to participate therein. According to the complainant the incident took place prior to the convening of Panchayat, as the accused started ploughing the piece of disputed land. In his deposition he has stated that after the incident he dictated the report to Natthoo at Ajnar Bus Stand and handed over the same at the police station. He has been cross-examined by the defence and an effort has been made to confuse the witness regarding his visit to the police station. At one place he has stated that he has gone to the police station for submitting his report and the second time he went there along with the dead bodies. He has further stated that on his 1st visit he reached the police station at about 1.30 - 2.00 p.m. He stayed at the police station for half an hour and returned by bus and the police reached at the spot before he reached there. The defence has tried to say that the scribe of the report is the Clerk of the Advocate and has filed certain certified copies of first information report allegedly scribed by him, but it would not make any different considering the promptness of the report and motive alleged for the accused. Thus, we find that the crime has been promptly reported to the police. Prompt report of the incident to the police is always considered important in criminal trial, as it rules out the possibilities of deliberations and concoction in its preparation. 14. The motive for the offence for the accused had been mentioned in the prompt report of the complainant, wherein he has stated that his son-in-law obtained lease of a land situated near Khojo Kua and about a year before the incident he got it measured. On measurement it was found that the accused persons have cultivated about 5 Hath of the lease land of deceased Karan Singh. It has been further noted that the accused persons wanted to take the aforesaid land from his son-in-law and they were not returning back his land on which they had encroached upon. On measurement it was found that the accused persons have cultivated about 5 Hath of the lease land of deceased Karan Singh. It has been further noted that the accused persons wanted to take the aforesaid land from his son-in-law and they were not returning back his land on which they had encroached upon. The report further stated that to resolve the dispute a Panchayat was convened on 25.11.1997 in which the complainant, Kishori Chaube and Prabhu Dayal Tiwari and others were assembling, however at about 11.30 p.m. accused Shiv Singh had ploughed the disputed land, which was protested by both the deceased, whereupon all the accused persons armed with axes assaulted them till death. Learned counsel for the appellants has argued that this motive is not proved as two other panches, namely, Prabhu Dayal PW-3 and Kishori PW-6 have not supported the prosecution story and have been declared hostile. This argument has no force. PW-2 has not stated a word about the Panchayat. He has pleaded ignorance about any land dispute between the deceased and the accused persons. However, Kishori PW-6 has stated that about a year ago at about 7.30 a.m. Karan Singh had taken him to his field ( place of incident) for identification of stones embedded in the earth. According to this witness the dispute was between Karan Singh and Aman Singh, however, later he has stated that Aman Singh and Mulayam Singh ( father of accused-appellants) belonged to one family. It is trite that the evidence of a hostile witness is not erased from the record, the part of his statement which finds corroboration from other evidence of prosecution can be taken into consideration. The accused persons have denied any land dispute with the deceased in their statement under section 313 Cr.P.C. The village of PW-1 is situated about one and half kilo meters from village Arghat Mau, so his presence in village Arghat Mau for participation in the Panchayat is duly proved. The investigating officer in the site plan Ext. Ka-14 has shown the place of occurrence. He has collected the plain and blood stained earth from the spot. The recovery of blood stained earth from the place of incident fixes the spot of the incident. The site plan shows that the fields of accused persons are adjacent to the fields of deceased in northern side. Ka-14 has shown the place of occurrence. He has collected the plain and blood stained earth from the spot. The recovery of blood stained earth from the place of incident fixes the spot of the incident. The site plan shows that the fields of accused persons are adjacent to the fields of deceased in northern side. Thus, we find that the alleged motive and place of incident are well proved. 15. Learned counsel for the appellants next argued that the prosecution has examined only interested and partisan witnesses, independent witnesses have not supported the prosecution story and the names of PW-3 and PW-4 ( minor daughters of the deceased) do not find place in the FIR, so the prosecution story is liable to be rejected. It is true that in the written report the complainant has not noted the names of PW-3 and PW-4, who were of tender age at the time of the incident. He has noted the names of Prabhu Dayal and Kishore Chaube and both of them have been produced by the prosecution, but they did not support the prosecution story with regard to the complicity of the accused persons in the crime. Thus, the prosecution can not be blamed for withholding any material witness. The complainant is a middle aged man, his young daughter and son-in-law were done to death in his presence, therefore, he must be under tremendous mental trauma and agony. In these circumstances non mention of the names of PW-3 and PW-4 in the written report would not affect the prosecution story. It is true that PW-1, PW-3 and PW-4 are interested and partisan witnesses, but it does not mean that their evidence should be rejected on this ground alone. However, their testimony would be subject to closure scrutiny with care and caution. 16. PW-1 has narrated the manner of incident in his examination in chief. He has been cross-examined by the defence at length, wherein he has stated that his village is situated at a distance of one and half kilo meters from the village of the deceased and the accused persons. He reached there at about 6.00-6.30 a.m. He has further stated that he along with Kishori Chaube and Prabhu Dayal reached at the spot at about 8.00 a.m. and other persons of Panchayat could not reach there. He has successfully withstood the test of cross-examination. He reached there at about 6.00-6.30 a.m. He has further stated that he along with Kishori Chaube and Prabhu Dayal reached at the spot at about 8.00 a.m. and other persons of Panchayat could not reach there. He has successfully withstood the test of cross-examination. He has stated that in the incident Kishori Chaube also suffered axe injury, but he could not mention this fact in his report. He has further stated that Karan Singh had gone into field for restraining the deceased from ploughing the field and the accused persons started assaulting him there. His daughter was also done death in the field. Thus, we find that the statement of the complainant fully corroborates the contents of his written report with regard to the motive and manner of incident. 17. Km. Kranti PW-3 was aged about 9 years on 21.1.1999. The Presiding Officer before recording her statement has asked certain general questions in order to assess her competence as a witness. She was not administered oath as she did not know the sanctity of oath. She has identified all the accused persons in the Court and has stated that they have killed her mother and father in the field near Khojo Kua by axes. She has also stated the names of Halkai and Kishori as eye witnesses of the incident. The time of the incident has also been given by her. In her cross- examination she has stated that she was grazing the animals at the Pahadiya, which as per site plan is near the spot. She has also corroborated PW-1 that he had reached the house of the deceased at about 6.00 -7.00 a.m. on the day of incident. 18. Rani @ Kiran PW-4 is another minor daughter of both the deceased. She has stated that her parents were assaulted by all the three accused persons present in the Court with axes in their field. There were two Brahmans and her grand father Halkai at the spot. She and her sister were near the Mahua tree and they had witnessed the incident. In her cross-examination she had admitted her interrogation by the investigating officer. In cross-examination she stated that the accused persons started assaulting the deceased from the field till Mahua tree and Pahadiya. This statement of the witness inspires confidence, because the dead body of Karan Singh had been found by the investigating officer near Mahua tree. In her cross-examination she had admitted her interrogation by the investigating officer. In cross-examination she stated that the accused persons started assaulting the deceased from the field till Mahua tree and Pahadiya. This statement of the witness inspires confidence, because the dead body of Karan Singh had been found by the investigating officer near Mahua tree. The investigating officer PW-8 has stated in his cross-examination that he interrogated Km. Kranti and Km. Rani @ Kiran a month after the incident, because it was the election period and he was busy in the Government duty. No doubt both the eye witnesses had been belatedly interrogated by the investigating officer, but on this ground alone the testimony of PW-3 and PW-4 can not be rejected. Thus, we find that the manner of the incident has been duly proved through the statements of PW-1, PW-3 and PW-4. 19. As we have seen that there are no material contradictions in the testimony of eye witnesses, whatever minor discrepancies have crept in, they are only because PW-3 and PW-4 are minor girls of very tender age and it can not be expected from them to have given minutest details of the incident. Further the variations are bound to occur in the statements of two or more natural witnesses, as if no discrepancy or contradiction is found, then such witness can be termed as tutored witnesses, who gave parrot like version in the Court. Every discrepancy or contradiction does not demolish the prosecution story, unless the contradictions are so material that they cut the very root of the case. It was a broad day light incident committed by the co-villagers, who were not foreigners to the witnesses of fact. 20. Coming to the last point of argument advanced by the counsel for the appellant regarding variation in the ocular and medical evidence, after going through the autopsy notes and testimony of Dr. Sagar PW-7, we do not find any substance in the argument. The consistent case of the prosecution is that both the deceased were assaulted by all the accused persons with axes. Deceased Karan Singh had sustained as many as five incised wounds on his body, three of them are above his neck. Smt. Ram Kunwar has sustained only one incised wound measuring 8 cm x 3.5 cm on the lower part of neck at anterior aspect 3 cm below from cervical vertebrae. Deceased Karan Singh had sustained as many as five incised wounds on his body, three of them are above his neck. Smt. Ram Kunwar has sustained only one incised wound measuring 8 cm x 3.5 cm on the lower part of neck at anterior aspect 3 cm below from cervical vertebrae. Her hyoid bone and fourth cervical vertebrae were fractured. Nothing adverse to the prosecution story has come in the cross examination of Dr. Sagar PW-7. Karan Singh deceased has sustained more injuries than his wife, which shows that the target of the accused persons of Karan Singh and when his wife intervened she was made silent by single of assault of axe on her neck. The doctor has simply stated that there can be variation of six hours either way in the estimated time of death of the deceased. Thus, we find that there is no discrepancies in the eye witness account and the medical evidence available on record, rather they corroborate each of them. 21. No other point has been argued before us. 22. In view of above, we find that the appeal sans merit and is accordingly dismissed. The impugned judgment and order of the Trial Court are upheld. Accused-appellant Shiv Singh Yadav @ Munna Yadav is on bail. His bail is cancelled. Steps should be taken immediately to take him into custody and sendtto prison for serving out the sentence awarded by the Trial Court. Other two appellants are already in jail, they would undergo the remaining part of their sentence. 23. Sri Chandra Prakash Singh, Amicus Curiae would be paid Rs.2,100/- by the State for arguing the appeal on behalf of appellants no. and 3 within a month. 24. Let certified copy of this judgment be immediately sent to the Court concerned and C.J.M., Mahoba for ensuring compliance, which should be reported within four weeks from today.