JUDGMENT : V.M. DESHPANDE, J. These two appeals, since arise out of the judgment delivered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur dated 3-8-2011 in Special Case No. 28/2008, were taken up simultaneously for hearing and they are being decided by this common judgment. 2. Criminal Appeal No. 230/2012 is filed by Mangesh Madhavrao Kapate, who was accused No. 1 before the Court below. He is convicted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur for the offence punishable under section 363 of the Indian Penal Code and on that count is directed to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. He is also convicted for the offence punishable under section 376 (2) (g) of the Indian Penal Code and is directed to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000/- and in default to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. The learned Judge of the Court below further recorded a finding of guilt against accused No. 1Mangesh for the offence punishable under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and on that count, he is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. The appellant-Mangesh is also convicted for the offence punishable under section 201 of Indian Penal Code and on that count the learned Judge has sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and in default to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months. 3. Appellant-Sham Subhashrao Kase, who is appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 234/2012 is convicted by the learned Court below for the offence punishable under section 376 (2) (g) of the Indian Penal Code and is sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 4,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. He is also convicted for the offence punishable under section 201 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. 4. We have heard Mr. 4,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. He is also convicted for the offence punishable under section 201 of Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. 4. We have heard Mr. S.G. Joshi, learned counsel appointed for the appellant in both these appeals and Mr. T.A. Mirza, learned A.P.P. For the State, in extenso. With their able assistance, this Court has minutely perused the record and proceedings for re-appreciation of the prosecution case. 5. The prosecution case, as it is unfolded during the course of trial is narrated hereunder : Deceased Anchal Manwar was four years of her age when her life was cut short. She was daughter of Shilpa Manwar (PW3). Marriage of Shilpa took place in the year 2003 with Sumedh Manwar. Shilpa gave birth to Anchal on 8-4-2004. The matrimonial ties between Shilpa and Sumedh could not continue beyond 2005 and their marriage was dissolved in the said year. After dissolution of her marriage, Shilpa (PW3) along with her minor daughter Anchal used to reside with her mother Venutai War (PW5) and her brother Atul War (PW1) at Bhagirathi Park, Wanadongri, Nagpur. On 16-5-2008, Atul (PW1) was required to go to Nagpur. He returned from Nagpur at 9.00 p.m. That time, he noticed absence of his niece-Anchal. Therefore, he, his mother Venutai and sister Shilpa started search of Anchal in the vicinity. However, Anchal could not be located. The trio continued their search till 11.00 p.m. albeit, in vein. Ultimately, they reached MIDC Police Station, Nagpur and Venutai (PW5) lodged missing report in the Police Station. The said missing report was taken in station diary vide Sanha Entry No. 54 at 23.10 p.m. and it was registered as Missing Report No. 45/2008. The said Missing Report is at Exh.-52 on the record. Vinay Sarode (PW12), PSI was attached to MIDC Police Station. His duty hours were from night time on 16-5-2008 till morning of 17-5-2008. He took report of Venutai. After the missing report was lodged, he gave broadcast message. He also gave instructions to the staff of night duty that they should look out for the girl whose missing report was lodged. 6. After lodging the missing report, Atul (PW1) along with his mother and sister returned to their house. He took report of Venutai. After the missing report was lodged, he gave broadcast message. He also gave instructions to the staff of night duty that they should look out for the girl whose missing report was lodged. 6. After lodging the missing report, Atul (PW1) along with his mother and sister returned to their house. That time, persons from their locality were gathered near his house. One Vinod Bhange informed him that he has seen appellant Mangesh Kapate was taking Anchal for lassi at the shop of Gopal Walde, acquitted accused No. 4. Therefore, they went towards house of appellant-Mangesh. However, Mangesh was not available at his house. Atul and others continued their search for Anchal till 4.00 a.m. in the morning without any success and, therefore, they returned to their house. 7. In the morning hours on 17-5-2008, Vinay Sarode (PW12) received an information that dead body of a girl is noticed in Bhagirathi Park. The said message was received at Police Station on 06.00 a.m. on 17-5-2008. Accordingly Vinay Sarode along with his staff went to the spot to notice one dead body lying in the open plot. The said plot was behind the plot of one Bhange. The open plot was bearing No. 44. 8. In between 6.00 to 6.30 a.m. Atul received an information that one dead body is lying behind the compound of Mahadev Bhange, which is adjacent to the house of appellant Mangesh. He ran towards the spot and to his misfortune the dead body was of his niece-Anchal. 9. Atul (PW1) identified the dead body. He lodged his report at Police Station, MIDC, Nagpur. Vinay Sarode (PW12) took the said report. The report lodged by Atul (PW1) is at Exh.-31. In the said report, Atul has specifically complained against appellant-Mangesh, who is the person responsible for kidnapping of Anchal and murdering her. Since the report was disclosing a cognizable offence, Vinay Sarode (PW12) registered the same as Crime No. 83/08 for the offence punishable under section 363 and 302 of Indian Penal Code. Printed FIR is at Exh.-32. 10. The Investigating Officer has conducted investigation in the various directions. Vinay Sarode (PW12) took various steps during investigation. Subsequently, the investigation was taken by Ramlakhan Yadav (PW16). Printed FIR is at Exh.-32. 10. The Investigating Officer has conducted investigation in the various directions. Vinay Sarode (PW12) took various steps during investigation. Subsequently, the investigation was taken by Ramlakhan Yadav (PW16). He also conducted the investigation in various aspects and ultimately the investigation was handed over to Shri Kote, ACP since it was revealed during the course of investigation that the deceased was belonging to the Scheduled Caste and relevant section under Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, was also added. During the investigation, ACP Kote was also assisted by Ganesh Bhawsar (PW15) who at the relevant time was API at MIDC Police Station. Under the guidance of ACP Kote, as per his directions Ganesh Bhawsar presented a chargesheet in the Court of JMFC Court No. 9, Nagpur, for the offence punishable under section 363, 376 (g), 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and under sections 3 (1) (xii) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities Act). The chargesheet was presented against four persons including the present appellants. The other two were Satish Warkhede and Gopal Walde. In the said crime, there were two juvenile accused also namely; Nandkishor Kapate, brother of appellant Mangesh and Ganesh Wankhede. The learned Magistrate found that the offence is exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions and hence he passed the necessary committal order. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge-8, Nagpur on 14-11-2008 framed charge against the appellants and against Satish and Gopal for the offence punishable under section 363, 376 (g), 302 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code along with section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and under section 3 (i) (xii) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. After full dress trial, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge acquitted original accused No. 3-Satish and accused No. 4-Gopal of all the offences. The learned Judge also acquitted both the appellants of the offence punishable under section 3 (1) (xii) of the SC and ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. However, recorded a guilt against them as narrated in the preceding paragraphs. 11. The first question that has to be answered by this Court is; what was the nature of unfortunate and untimely death of Anchal and whether prior to her death, she was subjected to sexual atrocities? 12. However, recorded a guilt against them as narrated in the preceding paragraphs. 11. The first question that has to be answered by this Court is; what was the nature of unfortunate and untimely death of Anchal and whether prior to her death, she was subjected to sexual atrocities? 12. Vinay Sarode (PW12) noted various injuries on the dead body of Anchal. He also found that blue coloured liquid was coming out of her mouth and nose. He noticed various injuries on her hand and also found injury marks on her thighs. He also noticed marks of injury on her neck. Her knicker was blood stained. He requested Panchas including Javed Mahajan (PW6), to act as pancha when he drew inquest panchanama. The inquest panchanama is at Exh.-61. The said panchanama is duly proved by Javed Mahajan (PW6). The panchas also noticed various injuries on the dead body. 13. on 17-5-2008 Dr. Pradip Dixit (PW8) was working as Professor in the Medical College, Nagpur. Dead body of Anchal was referred for post-mortem to the Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur by Police Station, MIDC Nagpur and the body was brought by Police Constable Jayram. Dr. Pradip Dixit received inquest panchanama and also received request for conducting the post-mortem. Accordingly, Dr. Pradip along with Dr. Abhijit conducted the post-mortem. At the time of post-mortem, he noticed that there were blush stains on clothes of Anchal. He also noticed discoloration of oral mucosa along with blue tongue. He found a blue coloured fluid was oozing from nose. He found blood with white fluid discharge from vagina. There was contusion to mucosal surface of labia majora and contusion on vagina all over. The hymen was torn at 11 O' clock, 9 O' clock and 7 O'clock position and red in colour. The doctor found following external injuries : 1. Post-Mortem abrasion present over left chick four in number, irregular in shape of size varying from 0.5 X 0.5 c.m. To 3/0.5 c.m. of yellowish brown colour. 2. Abrasion present over lower margin of left eye ball, outer side of size 0.5 X 0.2 c.m. reddish brown colour. 3. Abrasion present over left eyebrow in middle one third of size 0.5 X 0.2 c.m. reddish brown. 4. Crescentic abrasion present over left side of forehead 4 c.m. left of midline 2 c.m. above eyebro 0.3 c.m. long reddish brown colour. 5. 3. Abrasion present over left eyebrow in middle one third of size 0.5 X 0.2 c.m. reddish brown. 4. Crescentic abrasion present over left side of forehead 4 c.m. left of midline 2 c.m. above eyebro 0.3 c.m. long reddish brown colour. 5. Three abrasion present over left side of face in medidular area 3 c.m. left of chin of size 0.5 X 0.2 c.m., 0.2 X 0.2 c.m., 0.3 X 0.2 c.m. 6. Abrasion present over right side of face 1.00 c.m. above mallor prominence of size 1 X 1 c.m. reddish brown. 7. Abrasion present over front sides of neck in an area of size 9 X 1 c.m. extending from a point 4.00 c.m. right of mid line at the level of Thyroid prominence to a point 05 c.m. left of mid line at a point one c.m. above Thyroid prominence in mid line. Total 12 abrasions were seen in this area of size varing from 0.1 X 2 c.m. to 0.2 X 0.2 c.m. c.m. 6 are linear and 5 are cresentic. 8. Linear abrasion present over fron toif neck 0.5 c.m. right of a point on mid line two c.m. below Thyroid Cartilage 1.5 c.m. long. 9. Continued abrasion present over right side of neck, extending from seven c.m. right of a point on mid line two c.m. below Thyorid prominence to a point on back of neck, 4 c.m. right of mid line at the level of cervical seven covering the curvature of neck 6 X 2 c.m. 10. Linear abrasion extending upward and backward for 2 c.m. from a front end of injury No. 9. 11. Curvilinear abrasion 2 X 1 c.m. present 1 c.m. above injury No. 10. 12. Curvilinear abrasion present on back and outer size of neck on right side of neck 5 X 0.5 c.m. with abrasion of 1 X 1 c.m. at middle portion. 13. Linear abrasion present over back of neck extending from a point 1 c.m. right of midline at a level of cervical three to a point 4 c.m. left of mid line at a level of cervical 5, 5 c.m. long. 14. Linear abrasion present over back of neck extending from mid line at cervical five to a point 4 c.m. left of mid line at a level of cervical six. 15. 14. Linear abrasion present over back of neck extending from mid line at cervical five to a point 4 c.m. left of mid line at a level of cervical six. 15. Two linear abrasion present over neck extending from mid line at cervical six to a point 4 c.m. left of mid line at a level of cervical seven. Note that injury No. 14 and injury No. 15 are parallel to each other. 16. Abrasion present over right supra scapular region extending from 2 c.m. below mid cavicular extending from 2 c.m. below mid cavicular point to a point on back of neck. Three c.m. right of mid line at cervical seven 5 X 3 c.m. 17. Two linear abrasion present over back in supra scapular and scapular region extending from a point 6 c.m. left of mid line at thoracic second two to a point 12 c.m. left of mid line and throrasic five 8 c.m. long each, 1 c.m. apart. 18. Linear abrasion present over left scapular and supra scapular region extending from a point 5 c.m. left of mid line at thoracic six level to a point 1 c.m. left of mid line at thoracic ten level 10 c.m. long. 19. Abrasion present over back and thoracic eight level across mid line 2 X 0.5 c.m. 20. 4 abrasions present over thoracic and lumbar region placed in one line 1 c.m. apart from each other 5 c.m. left of mid line at a level thoracic eleven to lumber two. 21. Abrasion present over lumbar region 2 X 2 c.m. 22. Two linear abrasion present over 10 c.m. left mid line at lumbar two level three c.m. each. 23. Contused abrasion present over front of elbow joint 3 X 0.5 c.m. 24. Contused abrasion present over left arm upper 1/3rd 3/2 c.m. 25. Post-mortem abrasion present over both axilla in anterior axillary fold and also on both medial and lateral surface of size varying from 5 X 5 c.m to three X 1 c.m. 26. Linear abrasion present over right inframamary area of sixe 8 c.m. right of mid line and subcostal arch of three c.m. 27. Two linear abrasion present in left iliac region 5 c.m. left of mid line of size 2 X 0.5 c.m. and 1 X 1 c.m. 28. Linear abrasion present over right inframamary area of sixe 8 c.m. right of mid line and subcostal arch of three c.m. 27. Two linear abrasion present in left iliac region 5 c.m. left of mid line of size 2 X 0.5 c.m. and 1 X 1 c.m. 28. Curvilinear abrasion present over medial surface of right thigh two c.m. below inguinal fold 8 c.m. long. 29. Four cresentic abrasions one below other in one line on medial surface of thigh left side two c.m. below inguinal fold, one c.m. long each 1.5 - 1 c.m. apart from each other., 30. Four abrasions present over front of left thigh 3 c.m. below mid inguinal point transversely place in one line outer three of size 0.2 X 0.2 c.m. and inner of size 2 X 0.2 c.m. According to the Doctor, all the aforesaid injuries were fresh and reddish brown. According to the evidence of the doctor, all the injuries except injury nos. 1 and 25 were ante mortem. On internal examination of the body, the doctor found following injuries : (i) All internal organs are congested and oedematoous matter. (ii) There was soft tissue hemorrhage in the trap muscles of neck. (iii) There was no bluish discoloration of mucosa of oesophagus and stomach. (iv) There was 50 CC of yellowish fluid in stomach. According to the Doctor, cause of death was throttling. According to the Doctor, there was evidence of forceful sexual intercourse. Dr. Pradip Dixit (PW8) was very specific in pointing that the injuries on the neck with internal effect were sufficient to cause death. According to him, injuries noticed by him were caused within 12 hours prior to the death of person. He opined that death may be caused 12 to 24 hours before starting of examination of the dead body. Dr. Pradip was very specific during his evidence that he found bluish discoloration of oral mucosa with tongue a bluish colour fluid oozing from nose whereas, he found bluish discoloration in mucosa, oesophagus and stomach, the possible reason may be that fluid might have been put in the nose and mouth after death of deceased. As per the evidence of Dr. Pradip, the injury noticed by him in the private part are also ante mortem and also fresh. There is hardly any cross-examination of Dr. As per the evidence of Dr. Pradip, the injury noticed by him in the private part are also ante mortem and also fresh. There is hardly any cross-examination of Dr. Pradip in respect of the injuries found by him while conducting post-mortem and in support of his opinion about the forceful sexual intercourse with that little unfortunate girl. In view of the inquest panchanama Exh.-61, the post-mortem report Exh.-77 and the injuries as noticed which are mentioned in the post-mortem report and unchallenged evidence of Dr. Pradip Dixit, it is crystal clear that the death of Ku. Anchal was homicidal one. Prior to her death, she was subjected to sexual assault. We also record our finding on the basis of evidence of Dr. Pradip that after death of Anchal, blue coloured liquid was tried to be administered. This act obviously is just to misdirect everyone and to make a show that Anchal has gulped some poisonous substance. 14. Consequently, upon reaching to the finding that Anchal was subjected to the sexual assault and then she was done to death, the other question that is required to be answered by the Court is; whether the appellants are perpetrators of such a heinous crime as charged by the prosecution? 15. The present case is entirely based on circumstantial evidence. There is no direct evidence of sexual assault or committing her murder. Thus, the Court will be required to scrutinize the prosecution evidence in order to find out as to whether the prosecution has proved its case successfully keeping in the principles of law laid down by the Apex Court in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra, (1984) 4 SCC 116 . The prosecution is obliged to complete the chain. Not only that, the prosecution has to prove that the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say. they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty. 16. Atul (PW1), the maternal uncle of deceased, was residing at BhagirathI Park since 2000 along with his sister Shilpa, a divorcee and mother Venutai. Appellant-Mangesh used to reside opposite to the house of Atul whereas appellant Sham was resident of a layout adjacent to the layout wherein Atul is residing. On 16-5-2008, when Atul returned to his house at 9.00 p.m. he noticed absence of Anchal. Appellant-Mangesh used to reside opposite to the house of Atul whereas appellant Sham was resident of a layout adjacent to the layout wherein Atul is residing. On 16-5-2008, when Atul returned to his house at 9.00 p.m. he noticed absence of Anchal. He made enquiry about her with Shilpa and his mother Venutai. Upon that, Shilpa replied that Anchal is not seen since 8.00 p.m. The criticism is about the truthfulness of the prosecution case by learned counsel for the appellant to the effect that from 8.00 p.m. to 9.00 p.m. no steps were taken either by Venutai or Shilpa for tracing out Anchal, that by itself creates a serious doubt about the prosecution case. The evidence of Atul reveals that he reached to his house at 9.00 p.m. and at the time of dinner, he noticed absence of Anchal. Therefore, his enquiry about Anchal was most natural. Evidence of Shilpa (PW3), mother of Anchal would reveal that Ashfak Pathan (PW2) came to her house for demanding notes of her brother Atul in his absence. She informed Ashfak that Atul is not present. On that, Ashfak left the house. That time, Anchal was playing on the otta of the house. The time was in between 7.45 p.m. to 8.00 p.m. Thereafter, Shilpa was preparing meals and then went to the otta and gave a call to Anchal but she was not at the otta. In the meanwhile, Atul came to the house. Anchal playing on the otta of the house in the evening hours must be a regular feature. Therefore, after Ashfak left Atul's house, Shilpa started preparing meals. Much importance cannot be attached about the genuineness of the prosecution case merely because from 8.00 p.m. to 9.00 p.m., no steps were taken by Shilpa because Shilpa must be under impression that Anchal must be playing here and there and normally a person will not think about the worst. Hence, we are not ready to give much importance to the said aspect while evaluating the case. Further, not reacting to the situation urgently by Shilpa did not allow us to cast doubt about the entire prosecution case because different persons may react differently to the same situation. Therefore, a mother who does not anticipate the graver aspect and/or failed to get gravity of the situation then and there only, cannot be the sole reason to discredit the entire prosecution case. Therefore, a mother who does not anticipate the graver aspect and/or failed to get gravity of the situation then and there only, cannot be the sole reason to discredit the entire prosecution case. Accordingly, we reject the said submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants. 17. Ashfak Hasan Pathan (PW2) was knowing Atul (PW1) since last 7 years. They were classmates in the 11th standard and their friendship continued further in view of their studying alike. In view of the friendship with Atul, nobody can have a doubt that he was knowing Atul's sister Shilpa and Anchal and this is so because Ashfak visiting the house of Atul and was having family relations. In May 2008, Ashfak was preparing himself for appearing in Common Aptitude Test (CAT) for B.Ed. On that count, on 16-5-2008, he had been to the house of Atul (PW1) for collecting his notes. He had been to the house of Atul in between 7.45 to 8.00 p.m. Since, it was informed to him by Shilpa (PW3) that Atul is not available in the house, he went to his bike. When he was about to start his bike, he noticed that appellant Mangesh was going towards his house with deceased Anchal. Mangesh was engaged in preparing idols. His house is situated just opposite to the house of Atul. The claim of Ashfak that he used to go for placing orders of idols for their Mandal with Mangesh and hence he was knowing Mangesh is not challenged. Further, in view of the visits of Ashfak to the house of Atul and appellant-Mangesh is residing in front of the house of Atul, there is nothing unusual if Ashfak was knowing Mangesh. 18. The character of Ashfak as witness is seriously challenged by learned counsel for the appellants. According to him, this witness is purposefully introduced in the prosecution case. In order to buttress the said argument, the learned counsel submitted that though he accompanied Atul to the hospital and was with him till post-mortem and also when he had been to the spot where the dead body was found, though the police were present, he did not disclose anything to the police. In order to buttress the said argument, the learned counsel submitted that though he accompanied Atul to the hospital and was with him till post-mortem and also when he had been to the spot where the dead body was found, though the police were present, he did not disclose anything to the police. According to the learned counsel, non disclosure at the behest of Ashfak (PW2) that he has seen Mangesh carrying Anchal to his house at the earliest, creates doubt as to really he has noticed the said fact as claimed by him. Thus, he submitted that for belated disclosure of the said important fact, it will be hazardous to place reliance on the evidence of this witness. At the first blush, one may tend to attract such an argument and one may accept the same if the closer scrutiny to his evidence is not made. On closer scrutiny of the evidence of Ashfak (PW2), there is no iota of doubt in our mind that the submission of learned counsel is required to be rejected. Statement of Ashfak is recorded on 18-5-2008. The dead body of Anchal was found on 17-5-2008. From the evidence of this witness, it is clear that he was accompanying with Atul to the hospital from the spot where the dead body was found and he did not state the fact of Anchal seen in the company of Mangesh to the police. Mangesh was residing in front of the house of Atul. From the evidence of Shilpa, it is clear that on 16-5-2008 at 4.30 p.m., appellant-Mangesh dropped Anchal and when Shilpa questioned Mangesh about the said act, he replied that Anchal was taken by him for drinking lassi. This talk between Mangesh and Shilpa is also corroborated by Venutai (PW5). Therefore, it is very clear that Mangesh was not unfamiliar to Anchal. Not only that, the little girl must be having some affection towards Mangesh. Ashfak (PW2) is very specific in his evidence that when he noticed Mangesh taking away Anchal to his house, he did not feel any unusual because he felt that in view of good relations, she is being taken by appellant-Mangesh. Looking to the relations in between the families, it would be the last thing that will strike in the mind of Ashfak (PW2) that the appellant-Mangesh is perpetrator of the crime when he noticed the dead body of Anchal. Looking to the relations in between the families, it would be the last thing that will strike in the mind of Ashfak (PW2) that the appellant-Mangesh is perpetrator of the crime when he noticed the dead body of Anchal. Further, when the dead body was noticed by Ashfak (PW2) along with Atul (PW1) that time report was not lodged by Atul making specific accusation against Mangesh. Therefore, at that particular point of time and the place where the dead body was noticed, though police were present, there was no reason for Ashfak to suspect company of Anchal with Mangesh. Further, he has given explanation as to why he did not state it to police on 17-5-2008. We have reason to accept such an explanation. Since Ashfak was thickly associated with Atul, Shilpa and Anchal, when he saw the dead body of Anchal thrown in garbage, it must have made a great impact on his mind resulting into shock. It is common thing that the person may be under the shock when he found his near and dear in a dead condition. Therefore, merely because his statement is recorded after one day and especially when he has given a plausible explanation, we see no reason to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that this witness is introduced to suit the prosecution case. Accordingly, we reject the argument of learned counsel for the appellant in that behalf. 19. One Krushna Meghe (PW4), resident of Bhagirathi Park, had been to the house of Atul and Venutai for extending invitation of the marriage of daughter of his sister. For that purpose, he was intending to give invitation card to Smt. Venutai and also to the family of appellant-Mangesh. When he had been to the house of Venutai at about 7.45 to 8.00 p.m. along with his wife, that time Venutai was standing in the porch of her house and appellant-Mangesh was standing in front of house of Venutai. After having a talk with Venutai by his wife, Krushna gave invitation card to the appellant on the road itself. It appears that, that time Krushna made enquiry with appellant-Mangesh in respect of his father, a painter by profession, since he was intending to put his name on Sofa, which was to be gifted in marriage to his niece. After having a talk with Venutai by his wife, Krushna gave invitation card to the appellant on the road itself. It appears that, that time Krushna made enquiry with appellant-Mangesh in respect of his father, a painter by profession, since he was intending to put his name on Sofa, which was to be gifted in marriage to his niece. According to the evidence of Krushna, it was informed by appellant-Mangesh to him that his parents had gone out of the house and when they will return to the town, he will ask his father about the name to be put on the sofa. Thereafter, Krushna (PW4) left the said place. This witness Krushna (PW4) is not at all cross-examined by any of the learned cross-examiner during the trial. Thus, his entire evidence has gone unchallenged. Therefore, it is established on record about the presence of appellant in front of house of deceased Anchal between 7.45 to 8.00 p.m. on 16-5-2008 and the said fact is also duly corroborated by Ashafak (PW2) since his evidence discloses that at that point of time, he has seen Mangesh taking away Anchal towards his house. 20. The evidence of Krushna Meghe (PW4) is also corroborated by another witness Krushna Sonone (PW14), a close relative of Atul War (PW1), being his maternal uncle. His evidence would reveal that in between 7.30 p.m. to 7.45 p.m. he had been to the house of Atul and was sitting inside the house. When he was sitting, that time Anchal came and asked for food to her mother. Shilpa asked Anchal that since food is not ready, she should wait till she prepares the same. Then Anchal went outside. That time, Anchal was crying. He saw appellant-Mangesh taking Anchal towards his house. The presence of this Krushna Sonone in the house of Atul is corroborated by Ashfak (PW2). According to Ashfak, when he had been to the house of Atul for taking notes, he saw Krushna Sonone sitting on the bed in hall. 21. During the course of investigation, appellant Mangesh was referred for medical examination to Dr. Pradip Dixit (PW8). Dr. Pradip received a requisition dated 17-5-2008 from MIDC Police Station in respect of examination of Mangesh. At the time of examination of Mangesh, Dr. Pradip (PW8) noticed identification mark i.e. tattoo "Mangesh Jai Mata Di". What is important is that Dr. 21. During the course of investigation, appellant Mangesh was referred for medical examination to Dr. Pradip Dixit (PW8). Dr. Pradip received a requisition dated 17-5-2008 from MIDC Police Station in respect of examination of Mangesh. At the time of examination of Mangesh, Dr. Pradip (PW8) noticed identification mark i.e. tattoo "Mangesh Jai Mata Di". What is important is that Dr. Pradip noticed blue stains on the clothes of appellant Mangesh. On examination of his body, Dr.Pradip found following injuries on the person of appellant-Mangesh. "1. Lineal abrasion over back in right inter scapular region red in colour. 2. Contusion over right scapular region bluish red in colour 3 X 1 c.m. 3. There was contusion at the margins in external urethral meatus red in colour." Upon examination of appellant-Mangesh, Dr. Prardip gave following opinion "1. There is nothing to suggest that the said person is incapable of performing sexual intercourse. 2. It is likely that the said person has indulged in forceful sexual intercourse in last 24 hours. The injury noticed by me on his person were fresh caused within 24 hours." Accordingly, he prepared a certificate. The said certificate is at Exh.-79 on record. From the evidence of Dr. Pradip and also from the contemporary document Exh.-79, it is amply clear that the doctor not only found external injuries on body of appellant-Mangesh but also noticed injuries on private parts of Mangesh. In addition to such injuries, he has noticed blue stains on the clothes of appellant-Mangesh. Accordingly, he has mentioned the same in Exh.-79. Insofar as the examination of Mangesh by Doctor Pradip is concerned, the same is challenged during the course of cross-examination. However, the line of cross-examination would reveal that the same was challenged on some procedural aspect. What is important is that it was tried to be established through Dr. Pradip's cross-examination in respect of injury noticed by him on the private part of Mangesh that such injury is possible if a person is forcibly masturbated, the contusion is possible. The said aspect is stoutly denied by Dr. Pradip (PW8). Further, there is no evidence and/or statement in the entire prosecution case to suggest that at any point of time, Mangesh was forced to masturbate. In that view of the matter, the Doctor's evidence is clinching one to show that such injury was caused due to forcible intercourse. 22. The said aspect is stoutly denied by Dr. Pradip (PW8). Further, there is no evidence and/or statement in the entire prosecution case to suggest that at any point of time, Mangesh was forced to masturbate. In that view of the matter, the Doctor's evidence is clinching one to show that such injury was caused due to forcible intercourse. 22. During the course of investigation, memorandum statement of appellant-Mangesh was recorded. He gave the said statement on 22-5-2008 in presence of Sonu Bhagat (PW10), a farmer. In his presence, he agreed to show the place wherein he kept bedsheet and also to show the place where the dead body was thrown. The said statement under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act is at Exh.-112. Since the place of the dead body was already known, that part of admissible portion of document Exh.-112 is of no use to the prosecution. However, Exh.-114, which is a recovery panchanama of bedsheet is consequent upon the discovery of bedsheet at the hands of appellant-Mangesh. Exh.-114 shows that bedsheet was having blood stains. The said bedsheet was sent to the chemical analyser by the Investigating Officer. In this context, it will be useful to refer a decision of Hon'ble Apex Court State of Maharashtra. Vs. Damu Gopinath Shinde, AIR 2000 SC 1691 . The Hon'ble Apex Court, while discussing the provision of section 27 of the Evidence Act, observed as under : "The basic idea embedded in section 27 of the Evidence Act is the doctrine of confirmation by subsequent events. The doctrine is founded on the principle that if any fact is discovered in a search made on the strength of any information obtained from a prisoner, such a discovery is a guarantee that the information supplied by the prisoner is true. The information might be confessional or non-inculpatory in nature, but if it results in discovery of a fact it becomes a reliable information. Hence the legislature permitted such information to be used as evidence by restricting the admissible portion to the minimum." Thus, the discovery of bedsheet, consequent upon statement under section 27 of the Evidence Act given by the appellant-Mangesh becomes a reliable information and can be used as evidence. 23. Various muddemal articles like clothes of the accused persons, clothes of the deceased, bedsheet amongst others were sent to Regional Forensic Laboratory, Nagpur vide requisition Exh.-137 in sealed condition. 23. Various muddemal articles like clothes of the accused persons, clothes of the deceased, bedsheet amongst others were sent to Regional Forensic Laboratory, Nagpur vide requisition Exh.-137 in sealed condition. Exh.-114, recovery panchanama of bedsheet shows that the said bedsheet was having not only blood stains but also other stains. Exh.-155, CA report shows that human blood was found on the shirt and panty of appellant-Mangesh. Also, there were stains of human blood on bedsheet. Jangya of Anchal was also having human blood stains. Though, the blood group is not determined, noticing the human blood on the clothes of appellant-Mangesh and bedsheet recovered at his instance and in the absence of any explanation for the same, it is definitely an incriminating circumstance against him to connect with the crime. Further, at the time of drawing inquest panchanama, Mithun Chakravarti (PW9) along with police officer Vinay Sarode (PW12) noticed that blue liquid was oozing out of the nostrils of the deceased and also clothes were found to be stained with blood. Even Dr. Pradip (PW8) also noticed blue stains on the clothes of appellant-Mangesh as observed above. Clothes of deceased Anchal namely; sleeveless jersey was noticed a blue dye having chemical characteristic and the same is phenol and cresol. The doctor, who performed post-mortem is very clear in his evidence that this particular liquid was tried to be administered to the deceased after her death. 24. Insofar as appellant-Sham is concerned, during the course of investigation, his statement under memorandum was recorded, which is at Exh.-113, in respect of showing the place where the dead body of Anchal was thrown. We cannot give any importance to such a disclosure statement for obvious reason. Further, the appellant-Sham was also referred for medical examination to Dr. Pradip (PW8). Exh.-81 is opinion as given by the Doctor. He was referred to the doctor on 20-5-2008. He found one scratch abrasion on right inter scapular space and brown scab. According to the Doctor the injury noticed was about days old. He found no smegma. Further, he did not notice any injury on his private part. It is to be noted that there is no evidence at all against Sham to show that either he was seen in the company of deceased Anchal independently or with appellant-Mangesh. Merely because on full-shirt of appellant-Sham human blood was noticed, that by itself will not be an incriminating circumstance. It is to be noted that there is no evidence at all against Sham to show that either he was seen in the company of deceased Anchal independently or with appellant-Mangesh. Merely because on full-shirt of appellant-Sham human blood was noticed, that by itself will not be an incriminating circumstance. The scientific evidence, is always in the nature of corroboration. It will be hazardous to record a finding of guilt against appellant-Sham only on the basis of few blood stains on the shirt, especially when he was having a five days old injury on his person. 25. On evaluation of entire prosecution case, following are the circumstances, appearing against the appellant-Mangesh only. (i) Appellant-Mangesh has taken Anchal for having lassi on 16-5-2008 at about 5.00 p.m. and dropped her in front of the house of the first informant-Atul. (ii) Mangesh was found to be present in front of the house of deceased Anchal on 16-5-2008 in between 7.45 to 8.00 p.m. (iii) Deceased Anchal was found in the company of Mangesh, in between 7.45 to 8.00 p.m. on 16-5-2008. (iv) At about 8.00 in the night of 16-5-2008, appellant-Mangesh took Anchal by catching her finger to his house. (v) From 8.00 p.m. on 16-5-2008, Anchal was missing. (vi) Mangesh was not found in his house when first informant Atul and others went to his house during the course of search of Anchal. (vii) Appellant-Mangesh was found in the house of one Walde at 3.30 a.m. on 17-5-2008 and was not available at the ordinary place of his residence without any reason. (viii) Injuries were noticed on the private part of appellant-Mangesh when he was examined by Dr. Pradip (PW8). (ix) There is no time lag between the presence of appellant-Mangesh in front of the house of the first informant and disappearance of Anchal. (x) It is established that the house of Mangesh was in his exclusive possession as his parents were out of Nagpur at the relevant time. (xi) The place where the dead body was found is very close to the house of appellant. (xii) Blue coloured liquid was oozing out of nostrils of the deceased Anchal also noticed by pancha witness Mithun Chakravarti and which is confirmed by the Doctor at the time of post-mortem. (xiii) As per document Exh.-79, Dr. Pradip noticed blood stains on the clothes of appellant-Mangesh at the time of his examination. (xii) Blue coloured liquid was oozing out of nostrils of the deceased Anchal also noticed by pancha witness Mithun Chakravarti and which is confirmed by the Doctor at the time of post-mortem. (xiii) As per document Exh.-79, Dr. Pradip noticed blood stains on the clothes of appellant-Mangesh at the time of his examination. (xiv) Stains of human blood were found on the shirt and undergarment of appellant-Mangesh without there being any explanation. The aforesaid circumstances and evaluation of the prosecution case leads us to record a finding that the appeal filed by appellant-Mangesh is meritless and deserves to be dismissed. At the same time, appeal filed by appellant-Sham needs to be allowed. 26. In view of above, we pass the following order. Criminal Appeal No. 230/2012 is dismissed. Criminal Appeal No. 234/2012 is allowed. The order of conviction and sentence passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur dated 3-8-2011 in Special Case No. 28/2008 is hereby quashed and set aside. The appellant- Sham Kase is acquitted of the offence punishable under sections 376 (g), 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant is directed to be set at liberty forthwith, if not required in any other case. The amount of fine, if any paid, be returned to him. The fees payable to the learned counsel appointed for the appellants are quantified at Rs. 5,000/- (Rs. Five Thousand only) each. However, the learned counsel states that he does not desire to have the fees and same may be paid to the High Court Bar Library, Nagpur as a donation on his behalf. The High Court Legal Services Sub Committee, Nagpur to pay the fees to the High Court Bar Library, Nagpur.