JUDGMENT Mr. M. Jeyapaul, J:- Accused Devinder Kumar @ Vicky, Hem Raj @ Titu, Dalip Kumar @ Tidda and Dharminder Pal @ Rinku Sharma were sent up for trial for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. All the four accused were convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. Accused Devinder Kumar @ Vicky has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1- DB of 2007, accused Hem Raj @ Titu has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 349-DB of 2007 and accused Dalip Kumar @ Tidda and Dharminder Pal @ Rinku Sharma have jointly filed Criminal Appeal No. 221-DB of 2007, challenging the verdict of conviction recorded by the trial Court. 2. As there was no representation for accused-appellants, Dalip Kumar @ Tidda and Dharminder Pal @ Rinku Sharma concerning Criminal Appeal No. 221-DB of 2007, Shri Vinod Ghai, learned counsel who entered appearance for accused Devinder @ Lucky in Criminal Appeal No. 1-DB of 2007, was appointed as Amicus Curiae. 3. a) The brief case of the prosecution is that on 13.2.2005 at about 8 AM, PW-2 Harcharan Singh who was Sarpanch of village Ajnali was going for his morning walk. He spotted two dead-bodies with injuries at a distance of about 100 yards near the Pahi leading to village Jassran. PW-2 along with one Ram Parkash met PW-17 Inspector Harbans Singh and lodged a complaint about spotting of two dead-bodies at the above location. On the basis of the statement given by PW-2, a formal First Information Report was registered. PW-17 made arrangement for taking photographs of the scene of occurrence along with the dead-bodies. He also prepared a site plan. b) PW-12 Dr.Baljit Singh conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead-bodies of Jagdish Ram and Mohan Ram on 13.2.2005. At about 1.30 PM, he conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Jagdish Ram and found the following injuries:- “ xxx xxx xxx. Injury No.1:- Incised wound 4 cm x 1.5 cm on the left side of chest at the level of second inter cosal face. Direction of the wound was posteriorly and was deep upto the lungs. Clotted blood was present. 2. Incised wound 5 cm x 2 cm on the front of the sternum wound was deep upto the bone and bone was infilterated, clotted blood was present. 3. Direction of the wound was posteriorly and was deep upto the lungs. Clotted blood was present. 2. Incised wound 5 cm x 2 cm on the front of the sternum wound was deep upto the bone and bone was infilterated, clotted blood was present. 3. Incised wound 4 cm x 1.5 cm on the right side of the chest about 6 cm away from the mid line and 4 cm away from the nipple. Directions of the wounds was posteriorly and lung deep. Clotted blood was present. 4. An incised wound 4 cm x 1 cm on the right side of the chest, about 1 cm away from the mid line and 3 cm away from the injury No.3. Wound was lung deep, clotted blood present. 5. An incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm on the right side of the chest at the level of 10th ribs, about 5 cm away from the mid line, clotted blood present. 6. An incised wound 3.5 cm x 1 cm on the right side of the abdomen just below the 12th rib. Clotted blood present. Wound was liver deep. 7. An incised wound 3 cm x 1.5 cm on the back of the left chest, at the lower border of the scapula, clotted blood present. 8. An incised wound 4 cm x 1 cm on the back of the right side of the chest at the level of D-10 vertibra, wound was muscle deep, clotted blood present. 9. Multiple incised wounds of various sizes present (eight in number) on the right lateral surface of the chest and abdomen. On opening of the chest whole of the chest cavity was full of blood on both sides.” At about 2.15 PM, PW-12 conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead-body of Mohan Ram and found the following injuries:- “Injuries:- 1) Multiple incised wound (six in number), present on the front of left upper chest, of various sizes. Clotted blood present. All the injuries were superficial. 2) An incised wound 3.5 cm x 1.5 cm on the right side of the chest about 6 cm away from the mid line and at the level of 6th costal space. Direction of the wound was posteriory, wound was lung deep, clotted blood present. Clotted blood present. All the injuries were superficial. 2) An incised wound 3.5 cm x 1.5 cm on the right side of the chest about 6 cm away from the mid line and at the level of 6th costal space. Direction of the wound was posteriory, wound was lung deep, clotted blood present. 3) An incised wound 4 cm x 1.5 cm on the right side of the chest 6 cm away from the mid line and 1.5 cm below the injury No.2. Wound was muscle deep, clotted blood present. 4) An incised wound 2 cm x 0.5 cm on the left side of chest 4 cm away from the mid line at the level of 8th inter costal space, wound was muscle deep, clotted blood was present. 5) An incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm on the left side of chest at the level of 10th rib, about 7 cm from the mid line, wound was muscle deep and clotted blood was present. 6) An incised wound 4 cm x 1 cm on the lower border of the sternum, clotted blood present. 7) Four incised wounds 3 cm x 1 cm in length present on the mid line of the abdomen above the umbigous, clotted blood present. 8) An incised wound 4 cm x 1 cm on the left iliac region, omentum was present outside the wounds, clotted blood was present. 9) An incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm on the left inguinal region, clotted blood present. 10) Incised wound 8 cm x 1 cm on the right iliac region, wound was deep upto the right gut. 11) An incised wound present on the 12th dorsal vertibra 3 cm x 1 cm in size. Clotted blood present. 12) An incised wound 4 cm x 1 cm present on the right side of the back at the level of 1-2 vertibra 4 cm away from the mid line, clotted blood present. 13) An incised wound 4 cm x 1 cm on the back and at the lower border of the left chest, clotted blood present. 14) An incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm on the left side of the back about 1 cm below the injury No.5, clotted blood present. 13) An incised wound 4 cm x 1 cm on the back and at the lower border of the left chest, clotted blood present. 14) An incised wound 3 cm x 1 cm on the left side of the back about 1 cm below the injury No.5, clotted blood present. On opening of the chest cavity, whole of the chest was full of blood on both sides, in the abdomen blood and fical matter was present.” He opined that all these injuries were ante-mortem in nature and they were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Death was caused on account of shock and haemorrhage due to multiple injuries found on the vital organs of the deceased. c) On 15.2.2005, PW-17 Inspector Harbans Singh found a truck bearing Registration No. RJ-07-G-5169 in front of a petrol pump owned by Channa Ram. He arrested Dalip Kumar @ Tidda and Devinder Kumar @ Vicky on 10.3.2005. Based upon the disclosure statements given by them separately, two Kirches stained with blood were recovered at their instance. Accused Dharminder Pal @ Rinku Sharma was also arrested on the same day i.e. 10.3.2005. On the basis of the disclosure statement given by him, registration certificate of the above-said truck bearing No. RJ-07-G-5169 was recovered. Accused Hem Raj @ Titu was arrested on 13.3.2005. On the basis of his disclosure statement, a blood stained Kirch was recovered under separate recovery memo. d) The material objects recovered were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination. The FSL report, Exhibit PD, would reveal that all the three Kirches recovered from accused Dalip Kumar @ Tidda, Hem Raj @ Titu and Devinder Kumar @ Vicky were tainted with human blood. e) PW-17 having completed the investigation, laid final report as against all these four accused. 4. PW-1 Ganga Ram, brother of the deceased Jagdish Ram, identified the dead body of Jagdish Ram based upon the clothes of the deceased. 5. PW-2 Harcharan Singh, Sarpanch of the village, deposes that he spotted both the dead bodies near Pahi leading to village Jassran and immediately thereupon, he lodged the report to PW-17. 6. PW-3 Jang Singh was examined by the prosecution to demonstrate that accused Dalip Kumar @ Tidda and Devinder Kumar @ Vicky suffered disclosure statements to him. 7. 5. PW-2 Harcharan Singh, Sarpanch of the village, deposes that he spotted both the dead bodies near Pahi leading to village Jassran and immediately thereupon, he lodged the report to PW-17. 6. PW-3 Jang Singh was examined by the prosecution to demonstrate that accused Dalip Kumar @ Tidda and Devinder Kumar @ Vicky suffered disclosure statements to him. 7. PW-4 Baldev Singh was examined by the prosecution to demonstrate that he was present at the time of arrest of Dalip Kumar @ Tidda and Devinder Kumar @ Vicky. But unfortunately, PW-3 and PW-4 turned hostile to the case of the prosecution. 8. PW-5 Sandeep Mittal, proprietor of S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda, speaks to the fact that he weighed the truck bearing registration No. RJ-07-G-5169 on 22.2.2005. The net weight of the junk in the said truck weighed 237 quintal 85 kgs. The receipt issued by him was exhibited as Exhibit PW-5/A. 9. PW-6 Faida Ram and PW-7 Swaran Ram failed to support the case of the prosecution. 10. PW-9 Tilak Raj has spoken to the fact that on 13.2.2005, he saw the two dead bodies at Focal Point. 11. PW-10 Anil Kumar, Clerk attached to Municipal Committee, Mandi Gobindgarh, deposes that as per Slip No. 91 dated 12.2.2005 marked as Exhibit PW-10/A, the vehicle bearing registration No. RJ-07-G-5169 entered into the municipal area on the said date. 12. PW-11 Rahul Gaba, Scrap dealer, made arrangements to load 24 tonnes and 835 kgs. of scrap material from Siri Gee Steel Corporation at Rajkot (Gujarat) for delivery to A.R.Alliance, Nasrali Road, Mandi Gobindgarh. He also speaks to the fact that for 5-6 days the truck did not reach Mandi Gobindgarh. 13. PW-14 Piara Singh, Scrap dealer, has deposed that all the four accused persons came to his shop in a maruti car on 12.2.2005 at about 9 PM with the recommendation of PW-7 Swaran Ram and he after verifying the genuineness of the scrap material, purchased 10½ quintals of scrap material from them. He thereafter sold the scrap material to PW-6 Faida Ram, scrap dealer. 14. The accused have set up a plea that they were innocent but unfortunately, they were falsely implicated in the case of double murder. 15. On the side of the defence, Exhibits D-1 to D-4 were exhibited through PW-5 Sandeep Mittal. He thereafter sold the scrap material to PW-6 Faida Ram, scrap dealer. 14. The accused have set up a plea that they were innocent but unfortunately, they were falsely implicated in the case of double murder. 15. On the side of the defence, Exhibits D-1 to D-4 were exhibited through PW-5 Sandeep Mittal. The defence has produced slips Exhibits D-1 to D-4, to show that S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda owned by PW-5 Sandeep Mittal issued slips Exhibits D-1 to D-4, as though the same truck was again brought to S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda on 30.9.2005 for weighment and the truck weighed the same very quantity of scrap material. 16. Trial Court having relied upon the evidence of PW-11 Rahul Gaba and PW-14 Piara Singh, in the background of the disclosure statements, recovery made thereupon and the FSL report, recorded conviction as against all the four accused. 17. Mr. Vinod Ghai, learned counsel for the accused in Criminal Appeal No. 1-DB of 2007 and Amicus Curiae for the accused in Criminal Appeal No. 221-DB of 2007, would vehemently submit that there is no evidence to establish that the accused committed double murder. In the absence of ocular testimony, the prosecution is bound to establish a chain of circumstances to indicate unerringly that these accused perpetrated the crime of double murder. The evidence of PW-14 does not inspire confidence. As no independent witness was associated and the witnesses associated for disclosure statements and recovery of material objects, were also not examined, the Court cannot give much credence to the recovery of material objects from the accused. FSL report also does not clinchingly establish that the accused were the perpetrators of crime of murder. None of the employees of Siri Gee Steel Corporation, Rajkot(Gujarat) or A.R. Alliance Company at Mandi Gobindgarh were examined to speak to the fact that PW-11 Rahul Gaba arranged transporation of scrap material from Gujarat for delivery at Mandi Gobindgarh. Neither the owner of the truck nor the officials from the transport company were examined to speak about the loading of the bulk quantity of scrap material in the truck. The shortage of 10½ quintals of scrap material in the truck was also not established beyond reasonable doubt. Neither the owner of the truck nor the officials from the transport company were examined to speak about the loading of the bulk quantity of scrap material in the truck. The shortage of 10½ quintals of scrap material in the truck was also not established beyond reasonable doubt. The recovery of the truck at the petrol pump raises a suspicion as none of the employees of the petrol pump were examined to establish the parking of the truck in their premises for more than 7 days. The evidence of PW-5 Sandeep Mittal to the effect that he weighed the truck on 22.2.2005 and estimated the shortage, also does not inspire confidence in the face of the slips Exhibits D-1 to D-4, produced by the defence to establish that the employees of S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda had the practice of issuing slips even without verifying the vehicles which came for weighment. PW-17 does not speak about the safe custody of weapons of offence before ever they were dispatched to Forensic Science Laboratory. Therefore, it is his submission that the prosecution has failed to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. 18. Mr. Sarvesh Gupta, learned counsel for accused in Criminal Appeal No. 349-DB of 2007, adopted the submissions made by Shri Vinod Ghai, learned counsel. 19. Learned Additional Advocate General, Punjab, appearing for the State of Punjab, would submit that no satisfactory explanation was forthcoming from the accused to the incriminating circumstances brought to their notice under Section 313 Cr.P.C. It is his submission that the evidence of PW-5 Sandeep Mittal, PW-11 Rahul Gaba and PW-14 Piara Singh in the background of the recovery of material objects and the FSL report, would establish that these accused committed double murder as alleged by the prosecution. 20. We have carefully evaluated the entire materials on record in the background of the rival submissions made before us. Admittedly, there is no ocular evidence to establish case of double murder. The prosecution has relied upon various circumstances spoken to by the witnesses to establish its case. In a case based upon circumstantial evidence, the circumstances projected by the prosecution should unerringly point to the guilt of the accused. The evidence on record should be inconsistent with the innocence of the accused and consistent with the guilt of the accused. The prosecution has relied upon various circumstances spoken to by the witnesses to establish its case. In a case based upon circumstantial evidence, the circumstances projected by the prosecution should unerringly point to the guilt of the accused. The evidence on record should be inconsistent with the innocence of the accused and consistent with the guilt of the accused. If any of the chain in the material circumstances gets snapped, the case of the prosecution would crumble down. 21. PW-2 Harcharan Singh, Sarpanch of the village, had spotted two dead bodies near the Pahi leading to village Jassran. PW-1 Ganga Ram had identified his deceased brother Jagdish Ram based upon the clothes of the dead-body. PW-12 Dr. Balwinder Singh having noted down the injuries during the course of post-mortem examination of both the dead bodies has come to the conclusion that both the deceased had died on account of the ante-mortem injuries they received in their vital organs. Shock and haemorrhage was the immediate cause of death as per the opinion expressed by PW-12. With the above materials on record, the prosecution could establish that deceased Jagdish Ram and Mohan Ram attained homicidal death. 22. We have to find out whether the prosecution could establish the material circumstances clinching the involvement of these four accused in the crime of double murder. 23. PW-14 Piara Singh has deposed that on 12.2.2005 at about 9 PM, all the accused persons came to his shop at Mandi Gobindgarh in a maruti car. PW-7 Swaran Ram told him that these accused persons had scrap materials for sale. The accused having brought the scrap materials in the truck, sold only 10½ quintals of scrap materials to him. He in turn sold the same to PW-6 Faida Ram. He would also depose that he got prepared the slip Exhibit PW-14/A, containing the number of the truck through PW-7 Swaran Ram. 24. It is to be noted that PW-6 Faida Ram and PW-7 Swaran Ram have completely turned hostile and failed to support the case of the prosecution. 25. Two important aspects have been left unanswered by the prosecution. The first question which agitates our mind is why the accused had not chosen to sell away the scrap materials to PW-14 when they had brought the entire chunk of scrap materials in the truck to the shop of PW-14 ?. 25. Two important aspects have been left unanswered by the prosecution. The first question which agitates our mind is why the accused had not chosen to sell away the scrap materials to PW-14 when they had brought the entire chunk of scrap materials in the truck to the shop of PW-14 ?. It is the case of the prosecution that the driver and cleaner of the truck were murdered only for gain. If that be so, there was no reason for the accused not to transact business in spite of the major quantity of the scrap materials found in the truck. It is to be noted at this juncture that it is not the case of the prosecution that neither PW-14 nor PW-6 was prepared to purchase the entire quantity of scrap materials found in the truck. It is quite unnatural that the accused chose to sell away only a part of the scrap materials. The second question which arises in the facts and circumstances projected by the prosecution is why PW-14 had got prepared a slip containing the number of the truck alone through PW-7 Swaran Ram ?. It is against common sense that a person would note down only the number of the truck without other particulars and the signature of the person who dealt with the scrap materials. 26. Further, in the face of the hostility shown to the version of the prosecution by PW-6 and PW-7, we genuinely doubt the case of the prosecution that PW-14 Piara Singh, Scrap dealer, in fact purchased 10½ quintals of scrap materials from the accused and sold the same to PW-6 Faida Ram. 27. It is the case of the prosecution that the entire scrap materials were purchased and loaded in the truck from Siri Gee Steel Corporation, Rajkot (Rajasthan) for the purpose of delivery at Mandi Gobindgarh. In all fairness, the investigation officials should have examined the employees of Siri Gee Steel Corporation to establish the exact bulk quantity of scrap materials which were loaded in the truck as per the orders of A.R. Alliance Company, Mandi Gobindgarh. The investigation officials should have also examined an official from A.R. Alliance, Mandi Gobindgarh, to demonstrate that an order was placed by the said company for such bulk quantity of scrap materials from Gujarat. The investigation officials should have also examined an official from A.R. Alliance, Mandi Gobindgarh, to demonstrate that an order was placed by the said company for such bulk quantity of scrap materials from Gujarat. Unfortunately, no one from these two companies was examined to establish the order placed by a company at Mandi Gobindgarh to a company in Gujarat and the actual scrap materials loaded in the truck. 28. PW-17 Inspector Harbans Singh who investigated the case would depose that an Assistant Sub Inspector was sent to Siri Gee Steel Corporation, Rajkot (Gujarat) but he had not recorded statement of any of the employees of Siri Gee Steel Corporation, Rajkot (Gujarat). PW-17 would further admit that no one from A.R. Alliance Company, Mandi Gobindgarh, was also examined by him. Neither the owner of the truck nor the employee of the transport company was examined to speak about the loading of the exact quantity of the scrap materials in the truck. 29. PW-11 Rahul Gaba, Broker at Mandi Gobindgarh, had allegedly organized loading of the bulk quantity of the scrap materials from Gujarat for delivery at Mandi Gobindgarh. In the absence of any written contract he had with A.R.Alliance Company at Mandi Gobindgarh, we are not prepared to accept the contention of the prosecution that PW-11 Rahul Gaba, a broker at Mandi Gobindgarh, made arrangements for transportation of scrap materials from Gujarat. No order placed by A.R. Alliance Company was also recovered and produced before the Court. PW-11 has admitted that his name was not referred to in any of the records relating to the transportation of junk materials from Siri Gee Steel Corporation, Rajkot (Gujarat) . PW-11 was also not a registered scrap dealer or a broker. He would very frankly admit that he did not even know the name of the transporter of the truck. The consignment receipt was also not produced by him to establish that he in fact dealt with the scrap materials transported from Siri Gee Steel Corporation, Rajkot (Gujarat) through truck bearing registration No. RJ-07G-5169. The truck was to arrive as per schedule as early as on 10.2.2005 but the truck was detected, as per the case of the prosecution, by PW-17 Inspector Harbans Singh only on 15.2.2005. The truck was to arrive as per schedule as early as on 10.2.2005 but the truck was detected, as per the case of the prosecution, by PW-17 Inspector Harbans Singh only on 15.2.2005. Being the person who allegedly organized the transportation of bulk quantity of the junk materials, PW-11 was expected to show anxiety and make a complaint in case the truck did not arrive within a reasonable period. Never had he complained about the non-arrival of the truck in spite of the fact that the truck had not arrived for 5 long days. His evidence does not inspire confidence. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold that the prosecution has failed to establish beyond reasonable doubt the exact quantity of scrap materials loaded in the truck by Siri Gee Steel Corporation, Rajkot (Gujarat). 30. The prosecution has come out with a case that 10½ quintals of scrap materials were short of the bulk quantity which were transported from Gurgaon. Let us evaluate the materials to find out whether the prosecution could establish the shortage of scrap materials in the truck. The evidence of PW-17 would go to establish that the truck was spotted in a petrol pump on 15.2.2005 and thereafter, it was taken into possession. No employee from the petrol pump was examined to establish that the truck bearing registration No. RJ-07G-5169 was found parked in their petrol pump. 31. PW-17 speaks to the fact that the truck was found parked in the police station till 22.2.2005. PW-17 never spoke about the fact that the truck was entrusted to the custody of PW-5 Sandeep Mittal, proprietor of S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda on 22.2.2005 for the purpose of weighing the materials in the truck. It was only PW-11 Rahul Gaba who would depose that the transporter took it from the police station for weighing the matrerials in the truck to S.K. Computer Dharam Kanda on 22.2.2005. 32. It is to be noted that the transporter who took the truck from the possession of police station was examined to establish that the truck was taken by him for weighment. PW-17 Inspector Harbans Singh the Investigating Officer in this case, would very casually depose that on 1.3.2005, a slip, Exhibit PW-5/A was handed over to him by PW-5 Sandeep Mittal of S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda. PW-17 Inspector Harbans Singh the Investigating Officer in this case, would very casually depose that on 1.3.2005, a slip, Exhibit PW-5/A was handed over to him by PW-5 Sandeep Mittal of S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda. We are unable to appreciate the casual approach of PW-17 in weighing the truck which was seized by him. No explanation is forthcoming as to why PW-17 in his capacity as the Investigating Officer failed to take the truck for weighment. Admittedly, he was also not present at the time when the materials in the truck were weighed at S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda. 33. PW-5 Sandeep Mittal would depose that he did not know who actually brought the truck for weighing the materials. He would admit that he did not make any entry in the slip, Exhibit PW-5/A and that it was made only by one Prem Kumar, another employee of S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda. He comes out with a damaging version that Prem Kumar would sometime note down the number of the truck even without making any physical verification of the truck. 34. In the above background, we have to analyze the defence documents Exhibits D-1 to D-4 exhibited through PW-5 Sandeep Mittal. Exhibits D-1 to D-4 would demonstrate the casual manner in which the slips of weighment are being prepared by the officials of the S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda. They have surprisingly issued the slips Exhibits D-1 to D-4 to show that the very same truck bearing registration No. RJ-07G-5169 which was in the custody of the Court, was produced on 30.9.2005, i.e. one day before PW-5 was examined before the trial Court and the same was found with the very weight reflected in the slip Exhibit PW-5/A. The truck bearing registration No. RJ-07G-5169 was never produced on 30.9.2005 to S.K.Computer Dharam Kanda for weighment but unfortunately, such slips have been casually and carelessly prepared and issued by the employees of PW-5. Therefore, no weight can be attached, as contended by the learned counsel for the accused, to the slip Exhibit PW- 5/A which indicates some shortage of bulk quantity which was allegedly transported through truck bearing registration No. RJ-07G-5169. 35. The prosecution has projected a case that PW-14 was approached by the accused through PW-7 and 10½ quintals of scrap material was purchased by PW-14 and thereafter, he sold the same to PW-6 Faida Ram. 35. The prosecution has projected a case that PW-14 was approached by the accused through PW-7 and 10½ quintals of scrap material was purchased by PW-14 and thereafter, he sold the same to PW-6 Faida Ram. PW-6 Faida Ram who allegedly purchased the above scrap materials, did not support the case of the prosecution. PW-17 did not think it fit to recover 10½ quintals of scrap materials allegedly purchased by PW- 6 from PW-14. Non-recovery of 10½ quintals of junk materials knocks out the very foundation of the case of the prosecution that from out of the bulk quantity of junk materials, a part of it was sold to PW-14 who ultimately sold the same to PW-6. 36. Let us now deal with the recovery of weapons and the Registration Certificate book of the truck, projected by the prosecution. PW-17 would depose that on the basis of the disclosure statements made by accused Dalip Kumar @ Tidda, Devinder Kumar @ Vicky and Hem Raj @ Titu, three blood-stained Kirches were recovered at their instance and on the basis of disclosure statement given by accused Dharminder Pal @ Rinku Sharma, the Registration Certificate book of the truck was recovered. It is to be noted that none of the recovery witnesses were examined by the prosecution before the trial Court. No independent witness was associated by PW-17 from the locality for effecting recovery of the material objects. PW-17 would candidly admit that the weapons and the R.C. Book were recovered from the open and accessible place to the public. 37. Of course, the FSL report Exhibit PD, would disclose that human blood was found on the three Kirches allegedly recovered from the accused. But there was no blood grouping. The weapons recovered in this case were sent only on 17.3.2005 to the FSL. The safe custody of these weapons was not at all spoken to by PW-17. Therefore, we find that it is totally unsafe to convict the accused based on FSL report. 38. The accused have set up a defence that a false case was foisted upon them. In the face of such rickety evidence, no explanation need be offered by the accused to defend themselves from the weak incriminating versions spoken to by the witnesses. It is only the prosecution that is bound to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. 38. The accused have set up a defence that a false case was foisted upon them. In the face of such rickety evidence, no explanation need be offered by the accused to defend themselves from the weak incriminating versions spoken to by the witnesses. It is only the prosecution that is bound to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt. Just because explanation has not flowed from the mouth of the accused, in the absence of clinching material to establish the case beyond reasonable doubt, the accused cannot be clamped with the serious offence of double murder. 39. We find that the investigation in a case of double murder has been perfunctorily done. Major loop holes in the case of the prosecution go to the advantage of the accused. There is also dirth of clinching materials to rope in the accused for the double murder. The evidence on record is also found to be very weak. In our considered view, the trial Court has seriously erred in convicting all the four accused for the offence of double murder. 40. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court as against all the four accused, namely, Devinder Kumar @ Vicky, Hem Raj @ Titu, Dalip Kumar @ Tidda and Dharminder Pal @ Rinku Sharma, for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC is set aside. All these four accused are acquitted of the charge under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC. The bail bonds executed by Devinder Kumar @ Vicky, Hem Raj @ Titu and Dharminder Pal @ Rinku Sharma shall stand discharged. Accused Dalip Kumar @ Tidda is ordered to be set at liberty forthwith if his custody is not required in connection with any other case. 41. In the result, all the three appeals, namely, Criminal Appeal No. 1-DB of 2007, Criminal Appeal No. 221-DB of 2007 and Criminal Appeal No. 349-DB of 2007 are allowed. --------------------