JUDGMENT Hon’ble Kalimullah Khan, J.—This Government Appeal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the State of U.P. against accused respondents, Vidya Ram, Gulfam sons of Lakhan, Hari Singh, s/o Pancham and Nathoo, son of Panjabi, all r/o village Kubari Samaspur, P.S. Zarif Nagar, District Badaun, against the impugned judgment and order dated 2.5.1983, passed by the then III Additional Sessions Judge, Badaun in Sessions Trial No. 80 of 1981, whereby he has recorded a finding of acquittal of all the aforesaid accused respondents. 2. During the pendency of this criminal appeal, accused respondent Vidya Ram has died, and therefore, the appeal against him has abated, vide order dated 14.3.2014. Therefore, this judgment pertains to remaining accused Gulfam, Hari Singh and Nathoo only. The aforesaid Government appeal has been filed challenging the aforesaid impugned judgment and order on the ground that learned trial Court has erred in disbelieving the evidence of first informant, Chandra Bhan, mainly on the ground that he is child witness. Likewise, he further erred in discarding the evidence of Bhagwan Singh (P.W.2) on the ground that he appears to be related to the first informant and he had not disclosed the occasion of his presence at spot. The none examination of all the independent witnesses, named in the FIR, is not fatal to the prosecution as the law does not require the quantity of evidence rather it require quality of evidence. Non lodging of the FIR by the injured Nathoo, who subsequently died, is not fatal to the prosecution. The medical evidence is consistent with the prosecution story. Lastly, he submitted that the acquittal of accused is contrary to the weight of evidence on record. It is bad in law and has resulted in miscarriage of justice. 3. As per the prosecution case, the incident has taken place on 26.9.1980, at about 6.30 a.m, within the limit of police station Zarif Nagar, district Badaun. The FIR was promptly lodged, the same day at 8.30 a.m., after covering a distance of five kilometers on bullock cart. First informant, Chandra Bhan, aged about 15 years, has made oral report to the aforesaid police station with an accusation that in the morning of the date of incident, his father, Nathoo had gone to plough his field. He too had followed him. First informant, Chandra Bhan, aged about 15 years, has made oral report to the aforesaid police station with an accusation that in the morning of the date of incident, his father, Nathoo had gone to plough his field. He too had followed him. Accused persons, who are the residents of the same village had a quarrel of ‘mend’ (a mound between two fields) of his field. At about 6.30 a.m, accused Vidya Ram, Gulfam, Hari Singh armed with spears and Nathoo, s/o Panjabi, armed with lathi reached in the field and asked to his father as to why had he damaged the ‘mend’ and he would be taught a lesson. All the accused assaulted his father Nathoo with lathies and ballams. The first informant and his father started crying, which attracted Bhudev, Bhole, Thakuri Akwam Jatav, Bhagwan Singh and Chagge, who scolded the accused. Nathoo, the father of the informant, had fell down after sustaining the injuries. All the accused fled away. Nathoo has got fracture in his wrist and sustained other injuries at his person. The informant with the aid of his mother, Smt. Kalloo took injured Nathoo on bullock-cart up to the police station and lodged this report with the prayer that his father could not walk from bullock cart to the police station building, therefore, police may see him in the bullock cart. 4. On the basis of the aforesaid oral report, the check report was drawn and case was registered in the general diary dated 26.9.1980, at 8.30 a.m., P.S. Zarifnagar, district Badaun, at Crime No. 149/1980, under Section 324, 325 and 323 IPC. 5. Injured Nathoo, hereinafter called the “deceased”, was sent to hospital after being interrogated by Daroga Ji. He was brought to Sahaswan hospital by police constable. The mother of the informant accompanied them whereas first informant stayed at the police station, where he was interrogated. As soon as the informant reached in Sahaswan hospital, injured Nathoo expired and his dead body was sent to Badaun. 6. Investigation started and after preparing the inquest and observing the necessary formalities, the dead body was sent to mortuary, where the postmortem examination was conducted on the body of the deceased. Following ante-mortem injuries were noticed at his body : 1. Contusion 6 cm x 3 cm on dorsum of the left lower ¼ of fore arm. 6. Investigation started and after preparing the inquest and observing the necessary formalities, the dead body was sent to mortuary, where the postmortem examination was conducted on the body of the deceased. Following ante-mortem injuries were noticed at his body : 1. Contusion 6 cm x 3 cm on dorsum of the left lower ¼ of fore arm. There is deformity of fore arm, confirm the fracture of both the bones of left. 2. Vertical punctured wound 1.5 cm x 0.25 cm x bone deep post apart of the lower ¼the of the left arm. 3. Punctured wound 1.5 cm x ¼ cm on lateral part of 1/3 upper arm. 4. Three punctured wounds vertically placed in an area of 3 cm x 5 cm also the left fore arm process size of each 1-1/2 cm x ¼ cm x bone deep. (5) Abraded contusion 10 cm x 5 cm on lateral part of right upper arm. (6) Punctured wound ½ cm x ¼ cm x bone deep 3 cm above right elbow joint. (7) Contusion 4 cm x 2 cm on lateral part of right occipital region. (8) Multiple contusion in an area of 14 cm x 20 cm on back of left side of chest 6.5 cm below the spine of right scapula. (9) Linear contusion 10 cm x 1 cm on lateral part of mid of right thigh. 13 cm below the right below anterior superior liac spine. (10) Punctured wound 1.5 cm x .25 cm x bone deep on front of right leg. (11) Contusion 9 cm x 3 cm on the lateral part of left lower of leg. (12) Punctured wound 1-1/2 cm x ¼ cm x bone deep on middle of left thigh at middle region. After the death of the deceased, case was converted under Section 304 IPC. After interrogating the witnesses, preparing the site plan and completing the investigation, I.O. submitted the charge-sheet against all the four accused for the offence of the murder of the deceased. 7. Case was committed to the Court of Sessions, where learned III Additional Sessions Judge, Badaun, framed the charge against all the aforesaid four accused under Section 302/34 IPC. They denied the charge and claimed their trial. 8. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined six P.Ws, in all. Out of whom, Chandra Bhan (P.W.1) and Bhagwan Singh (P.W.2) are the witnesses of fact. They denied the charge and claimed their trial. 8. In order to prove its case, prosecution examined six P.Ws, in all. Out of whom, Chandra Bhan (P.W.1) and Bhagwan Singh (P.W.2) are the witnesses of fact. Chandra Bhan has proved his oral report (Ext.ka-1) and deposed that his father was assaulted with spear and lathies by all the aforesaid four accused, Vidya Ram, Gulfam, Hari Singh and Nathoo, in his presence. He claimed to have witnessed the entire incident. Accused, after assaulting his father, left the scene only when they were scolded by the witnesses including Bhagwan Singh (P.W.2). 9. Bhagwan Singh (P.W.2) has supported the evidence of Chandra Bhan (P.W.1) and deposed that he has witnessed the incident from his own necked eyes. On hue and cry of Chandra Bhan and Nathoo (deceased), he alongwith other aforesaid witnesses reached at the spot and saw accused Vidya Ram, Gulfam and Hari Singh belaboring Nathoo Singh (deceased) with spears and accused Nathoo Singh with lathi. After sustaining injury, injured Nathoo Singh fell down, who was taken on cot by villagers and Chandra Bhan and his mother took him to police station on bullock cart. 10. Rampal Singh, S.O., Zarif Nagar (P.W.3), prepared the inquest and other necessary papers and proved the same. Dr. V.P. Bhatnagar, M.O. (P.W.4) has deposed that he has conducted the postmortem examination on the body of deceased Nathoo on 27.9.1980, at 9.30 a.m., in the Mortuary of district Badaun and prepared the postmortem examination report (Ext.Ka-9) in his own handwriting and signature. He has proved the same. Shri S.S. Chaudhari, S.I. (P.W.5), is the first investigating officer. He has examined injured Nathoo, under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and proved the extract of the aforesaid statement of the injured. Kripal Singh, Constable 265, examined as P.W. 6, has deposed that after preparing the chithi mazroobi, he was directed to take the injured to Sahaswan hospital. On 26.9.1980, at about 9.45 a.m., injured died at the moment he reached there in the hospital. Thereafter, this witness brought the deceased to the police station Sahaswan and informed the Head Moharrir that injured has died. The aforesaid information was entered into general diary by the head moharrir. After completing the inquest and necessary papers, S.I. Sahaswan, deputed him to carry the dead body for postmortem. Thereafter, this witness brought the deceased to the police station Sahaswan and informed the Head Moharrir that injured has died. The aforesaid information was entered into general diary by the head moharrir. After completing the inquest and necessary papers, S.I. Sahaswan, deputed him to carry the dead body for postmortem. Accordingly, he and a village chaukidar took the dead-body to mortuary at 5.00 p.m. On 27.9.1980, the dead body was subjected to postmortem. During his custody, the seal of the dead body was intact. 11. All the four accused were examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the prosecution case and attributed their false implication on account of enmity. Vidya Ram accused has stated that deceased Nathoo was challaned in several cases of dacoity and robbery. In the morning of the day of the incident, villagers had gone outside the village to attend the call of nature, where they found him unconscious. They informed it to the family members of Nathoo, who went there and brought him to house and thereafter falsely implicated him. Deceased Nathoo had so many enemies. Accused were called upon to adduce evidence in their defence. 12. They examined Chotelal (D.W.1). The aforesaid defence witness deposed that accused Vidya Ram, Gulfam, Hari Singh and Nathoo are the residents of his village. 2-1/2 years ago, early morning, he was going to plough his field. When, he reached at the field of Nathoo, he noticed that Nathoo was lying there unconscious and blood was oozing from his body. He returned to his house alongwith his plough & bulls and informed this fact to the wife of the deceased. Thereafter, he and Kalloo, wife of deceased, collected several persons and on cot, Nathoo was brought to the house, thereafter, he was taken by him, Kalloo, Amar Singh, Bhagwan Singh and other 2-4 persons to police station Zarifnagar, where they reached after about 1-1/2 to 02 hours. Nathoo was unconscious up to police station, from where, he was taken by police to Sahaswan hospital. He has further deposed that deceased Nathoo had contested cases of dacoity and robbery and other criminal cases. He was convicted in two dacoity cases. Four to six years prior to the incident of his murder, he had cut the nose and ears of someone, in which, he was prosecuted but he was acquitted. He has further deposed that deceased Nathoo had contested cases of dacoity and robbery and other criminal cases. He was convicted in two dacoity cases. Four to six years prior to the incident of his murder, he had cut the nose and ears of someone, in which, he was prosecuted but he was acquitted. The witness deposed that till departure of Nathoo from police station to hospital, F.I.R. was not lodged as it was not known till then as to who had assaulted him. 13. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, learned trial Court held that prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt and, therefore, accused Vidya Ram, Gulfam, Hari Singh and Nathoo were not found guilty of the offences punishable under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and accordingly he acquitted all of them vide impugned judgment and order dated 2.5.1983 on grounds that Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1 is a child witness; Bhagwan Singh, P.W.2 is a related and interested witness; no independent witness has been examined in this case; if deceased had gone to the police station in an injured condition then he himself should have lodged the F.I.R. but he did not lodge the same; statement of deceased Nathoo recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. might have been recorded by I.O. in order to create some evidence against the accused and the evidence of Chhote Lal, D.W. 1 clearly stated that Nathoo was found unconscious and lying in the field in an injured condition in the morning of date of occurrence; the document Exhibit Ka-16 filed by the prosecution to show relationship of the defence witness with the accused is of no help to the prosecution as prosecution evidence is not convincing and it is full of improbabilities and contradictions. 14. We have heard learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for the accused-respondents. Perused the record. Learned A.G.A. has submitted that none of the grounds of acquittal recorded by learned trial Court is tenable under the law. The evidence of a child witness aged about 15 years could not have been discarded by the learned trial Court merely on the ground that he was a child witness. Learned trial Court has not tested the I.Q. (Intelligence Quotient) of Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1 so called child witness. The evidence of a child witness aged about 15 years could not have been discarded by the learned trial Court merely on the ground that he was a child witness. Learned trial Court has not tested the I.Q. (Intelligence Quotient) of Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1 so called child witness. The informant, P.W. 1 Chandra Bhan aged about 15 years as disclosed by him was a person capable of forming a rational judgment of questions put to him. He was not lunatic or idiot. No such finding has been given by the learned trial Court to disbelieve the evidence. Likewise, the evidence of Bhagwan Singh, P.W. 2 could not have been discarded merely because he is an interested and related witness. Learned trial Court has not denied the fact that Chhote Lal, D.W. 1 was related to accused-respondents but still believed his evidence as gospel truth without any justifiable reason and, therefore, the finding of acquittal recorded by learned trial Court has resulted into a miscarriage of justice and deserves to be set aside. 15. Per contra, learned counsel for the accused-respondents has submitted that presence of Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1 and Bhagwan Singh, P.W. 2 on the place of incident is not proved by the evidence on record. Their evidence is contradictory to each other. There was no occasion for Bhagwan Singh, P.W. 2 to reach at the place of incident at the relevant time. His arrival there does not inspire confidence and, therefore, he has rightly been disbelieved by the learned trial Court. Likewise, the evidence of Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1 is also not worthy of credence for the simple reason that medical evidence does not support the prosecution story as embedded in the oral report lodged by informant. Post-mortem examination report reveals that there were liquefied material half-full in the stomach whereas small intestine was full of gases and large intestine was full of gases and fecal. He submitted that Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1 has deposed that before going to the field his father had gone to attend the call of nature and had not taken any food on the day of incident. Doctor who conducted the post-mortem examination has deposed that before actual death of deceased he would have taken meal 3-4 hours back. 16. It is undisputed that it was a case of homicidal death. Doctor who conducted the post-mortem examination has deposed that before actual death of deceased he would have taken meal 3-4 hours back. 16. It is undisputed that it was a case of homicidal death. Injuries sustained by the deceased may be caused by lathi and ballam. This fact is not challenged by the accused-respondents. Admittedly (as per the evidence of Chhotelal, D.W.1) deceased was alive after the morning of the day of incident, he was taken on the cot from the spot to his house then to the police station on bullock-cart. Therefore, there is no substance in the contention of learned counsel for the accused-respondents that deceased would have died sometime in the preceding night. Respondents themselves have examined Chhote Lal, D.W. 1, who says that deceased was taken to the police station in the morning. He was alive there. Thereafter he was sent to hospital. Even otherwise, it is not necessary that if a person has gone to attend the call of nature then he could have discharged the fecal matters as there are number of reasons that sometimes a person goes and tries to discharge fecal matters but fails for reason more than one. Admittedly, injured Nathoo was alive on the day of incident as alleged by prosecution, no further probe on this aspect of the matter is needed. The presence of punctured wounds and multiple contusions on the body of deceased fully corroborate the evidence adduced by prosecution that deceased was belabored by accused with spear and lathi. There is no inconsistency whatsoever in between the medical evidence and the ocular testimony. 17. The contention of learned counsel for the respondents that F.I.R. was not in existence till preparation of the inquest is belied by the fact that autopsy contained the crime number and section of the offence, there is no manipulation or any possibility of subsequent insertion of the aforesaid entries in the inquest. Likewise, there is no substance in his contention that learned trial Court has rightly disbelieved the testimony of Bhagwan Singh, P.W. 2 on the ground that he is a related and interested witness and he could not disclose the occasion for his presence at spot. 18. It is settled principle of the law that the testimony of a witness cannot be discarded merely because he is a interested and related to the victim or informant. 18. It is settled principle of the law that the testimony of a witness cannot be discarded merely because he is a interested and related to the victim or informant. The only legal requirement is that evidence of such a related and interested witness should go through the strict judicial scrutiny. If evidence is worthy of credence, it may be acted upon. 19. The learned counsel for the State has also brought to our notice some observations made by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the judgment in Dinesh Kumar v. State of Rajasthan, (2008) Cri LJ 4311, with respect to the evaluation of the evidence of an interested or relation witnesses. They are: “When the eyewitnesses are stated to be interested and inimically disposed towards the accused, it has to be noted that it would not be proper to conclude that they would shield the real culprit and rope in innocent persons. The truth or otherwise of the evidence has to be weighed pragmatically. The Court would be required to analyse the evidence of related witnesses and those witnesses who are inimically disposed towards the accused. But if after careful analysis and scrutiny of their evidence, the version given by the witnesses appears to be clear, cogent and credible, there is no reason to discard the same. Conviction can be made on the basis of such evidence”. 20. It is true, as contented, that a transformation has indeed taken place within the last three or four decades and from the query‘ why should an interested witness be believed ‘ to ‘ why should such a witness be disbelieved as he is not likely to leave out the real culprits’, reflects the anxiety and utter helplessness of criminal Courts as independent witness tend to turn hostile. 21. There is no evidence on record to show that Bhagwan Singh, P.W. 2 is closely related to informant Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1. He has deposed that on the previous day of the incident, he had gone to the deceased to purchase his bull. The final consideration amount of bull was not settled. There was some difference on the consideration amount of the bull in between him and deceased and that was the reason that in the next morning i.e. on day of the incident he again went to him to have a negotiation and to finalize the transaction. The final consideration amount of bull was not settled. There was some difference on the consideration amount of the bull in between him and deceased and that was the reason that in the next morning i.e. on day of the incident he again went to him to have a negotiation and to finalize the transaction. In fact, he reached to the house of the deceased whereas his wife Kallo informed him that deceased and his son both had gone to the field. Hence, he went to the field to have the negotiation already deferred. There he witnessed the incident. In spite of the aforesaid deposition available on record which were fetched out from his mouth during his cross-examination made by respondents, learned trial Court has wrongly held that he had not disclosed the reason of his arrival at the scene of incident. The witness has been cross-examined at length on this issue but his stand has not been shattered at all. Even I.O. has supported his version that he had told him in his statement recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that on the day of incident he had gone to the house of deceased. The suggestion has been made to him by defence/respondents and deposition has been made by Chhote Lal, D.W. 1 that deceased had already faced criminal prosecutions of dacoity, robbery, marpeet etc. but there is no documentary evidence filed in support thereof. In absence of any documentary evidence which is best evidence to prove the criminal antecedent of the deceased it cannot be believed that deceased had criminal antecedent. 22. This witness has fully supported the prosecution case and deposed that accused Nathoo with lathi and rest accused Vidya Ram, Hari Singh and Gulfam with ballam assaulted Nathoo deceased. His evidence is fully supported by medical evidence and further supported by the evidence of Chandra Bhan, P.W.1. Likewise, the contents of oral report fully supports the deposition of Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1. His presence at spot is natural. He has clearly stated that all the four accused had assaulted the deceased with spear and lathi as he has disclosed in his oral report. The witness has been cross-examined at length but nothing has been elicited from his mouth to disbelieve his evidence. His presence at spot is natural. He has clearly stated that all the four accused had assaulted the deceased with spear and lathi as he has disclosed in his oral report. The witness has been cross-examined at length but nothing has been elicited from his mouth to disbelieve his evidence. He has proved his oral report and denied the suggestions that some villagers had informed at his house in the darkness of the morning that deceased was lying there in the field in an injured condition. 23. We fail to understand as to why learned trial Court has overlooked the material aspect of the evidence on record that the F.I.R. is prompt; it is day light incident; accused are named in the F.I.R; specific weapon has been assigned to all the accused; specific role has also been assigned to them and there is absolutely no reason to falsely implicate the accused persons by Chandra Bhan,a P.W. 1, teenager boy aged about 15 years. It is not probable that he would spare the real culprit and would falsely implicate the innocent villagers. The post-mortem examination report fully supports the evidence of Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1 and Bhagwan Singh, P.W. 2 in letter and spirit. Their evidence are wholly reliable and worthy of credence but ignoring their evidence like anything the learned trial Court has committed gross illegality. The learned trial Court did not appreciate the evidence on record in its true and correct prospective and reached to a wrong conclusion as a result of which finding of acquittal recorded by him has definitely caused miscarriage of justice. 24. A child witness is a competent witness provided he is able to form the rational judgment of the question put to him. Undisputedly, the learned trial Court has not put any question to him to test his I.Q. and without doing so holding him an incompetent witness as being child is per-se illegal. A 15 years old boy cannot be said to be a child so as to disbelieve his testimony. Nothing has been fetched out from his mouth to establish that his deposition in the Court is an outcome of promptness or tutoring or otherwise, influencing his mind by some third agency to falsely implicate accused for no reasons whatsoever. 25. A 15 years old boy cannot be said to be a child so as to disbelieve his testimony. Nothing has been fetched out from his mouth to establish that his deposition in the Court is an outcome of promptness or tutoring or otherwise, influencing his mind by some third agency to falsely implicate accused for no reasons whatsoever. 25. On perusal of the evidence of Chadra Bhan, P.W. 1 it transpires that he was able to discern between right or wrong and despite searching his cross-examination made by the defence lawyer nothing adverse could be brought out. Chandra Bhan testified that accused Vidya Ram, Hari Singh and Gulfam armed with ballam and accused Natthoo armed with lathi assaulted the victim (deceased) when his father had gone to plough his filed and this witness also followed him and was present at the place of incident in the field. He has specified the weapon that each of the accused was holding and the manner of their use. It is undisputed that learned trial Court did not put any question to Chandra Bhan to ascertain his suitability as a witness. We, however, find from the evidence that he fully understood the implications of what he was saying and despite a stiff cross-examination nothing to discredit him could be brought out. Section 118 of Indian Evidence Act does not preclude a child from being a witness and only test which is applicable is as to whether the witness understood the sanctity of an oath and the import of the questions that were being put to him. 26. In Nivrutti Pandurang Kokate and others v. State of Maharashtra, (2008) 12 SCC 565 , it has been observed that Section 118 of the Evidence Act envisages that all persons shall be competent to testify unless the Court thinks otherwise. In summing up the various judgments on this issue, this is what this Court had to say: “The decision on the question whether the child witness has sufficient intelligence primarily rests with the trial Judge who notices his manners, his apparent possession or lack of intelligence, and the said Judge may resort to any examination which will tend to disclose his capacity and intelligence as well as his understanding of the obligation of an oath. The decision of the trial Court may, however, be disturbed by the higher Court if from what is preserved in the records, it is clear that his conclusion was erroneous. This precaution is necessary because child witnesses are amenable to tutoring and often live in a world of make-believe. Though it is an established principle that child witnesses are dangerous witnesses as they are pliable and liable to be influenced easily, shaped and moulded, but it is also an accepted norm that if after careful scrutiny of their evidence the Court comes to the conclusion that there is an impress of truth in it, there is no obstacle in the way of accepting the evidence of a child witness”. 27. We are of the opinion that Chandrabhan was aware of what had happened in the answers given by him in the cross of his evidence which clearly proved that he was a competent witness. We also find that Chandrabhan’s statement has been duly corroborated by the evidence of Bhagwan Singh, P.W. 2. 28. We have also gone through the medical evidence and find that it fully supports the prosecution story. The accused were armed with spear and lathi capable of causing punctured wounds and contusions. Deceased had sustained eight punctured wounds and more than five contusions because injury No. 8 was multiple contusion in an area of 14 cm x 20 cm of back of left side of chest 6.5 cm below spine of right scapula. The spiral and parietal bones had multiple fractured. 6-7 ribs from back of chest were broken. The right lungs was punctured at two places. Both bones of left lower 1/4th of forearm were fractured. Blood clots were found under membranes right side brain and blood clots was found in chest cavity deep. In the opinion of the doctor the aforesaid injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death of Natthoo (deceased) on 26.9.1980 at 9.30 a.m. All the aforesaid injuries are noted in the post-mortem examination report Exhibit Ka-9 proved by the doctor who has opined that all the injuries sustained by deceased could have been caused by spear and lathi. In this view of the matter learned trial Court has erred in not relying the evidence of a teen-ager child witness Chandrabhan and committed gross illegality which resulted into miscarriage of justice at his hands. 29. In this view of the matter learned trial Court has erred in not relying the evidence of a teen-ager child witness Chandrabhan and committed gross illegality which resulted into miscarriage of justice at his hands. 29. Non-examination of other witnesses named in the F.I.R. is not fatal to the prosecution in the facts and circumstances of this case because it is known to all concerned that normally no third person comes to support a true cause of an independent person in order to avoid to his own harassment in future at the hands of accused. Law does not require the quantity of evidence rather it requires the quality of evidence to prove the charge against the accused. There is nothing on record to create a doubt in the veracity of the deposition of Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1 and Bhagwan Singh, P.W. 2. In fact, it is not the number, the quantity, but the quality that is material. The time-honoured principle is that evidence has to be weighed and not counted. The test is whether the evidence has a ring of truth, is cogent, credible and trustworthy or otherwise. 30. In Namdeo v. State of Maharashtra, (2007) 14 SCC 150 , Hon’ble Supreme Court re-iterated the similar view observing that it is the quality and not the quantity of evidence which is necessary for proving or disproving a fact. The legal system has laid emphasis on value, weight and quality of evidence rather than on quantity, multiplicity or plurality of witnesses. It is, therefore, open to a competent Court to fully and completely rely on a solitary witness and record conviction. Conversely, it may acquit the accused in spite of testimony of several witnesses if it is not satisfied about the quality of evidence. 31. In Kunju @ Balachandran v. State of Taml Nadu, AIR 2008 SC 1381 , a similar view has been re-iterated placing reliance on various earlier judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court including Jagdish Prasad v. State of M.P., AIR 1994 SC 1251 ; and Vadivelu Thevar v. State of Madras, AIR 1957 SC 614 . 32. Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Hukum Singh and another v. State of Rajasthan, 2000(41) ACC 662, held as under: “The Public Prosecutor in such cases is not obliged to examine all the injured witnesses. 32. Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Hukum Singh and another v. State of Rajasthan, 2000(41) ACC 662, held as under: “The Public Prosecutor in such cases is not obliged to examine all the injured witnesses. If he is satisfied by examining any two or three of them, it is open to him to inform the Court that he did not propose to examine the remaining persons in that category. This will help not only the prosecution for relieving itself of the strain of adducing repetitive evidence on the same point but also helps the Court considerably in lessening the work-load. Time has come to make every effort possible to lessen the work-load, particularly those Courts crammed with cases, but without impairing the cause of justice.” 33. Contention of the learned counsel for the defence that the appellate Court should be slow in reversing the finding of acquittal recorded by trial Court bears no substance in the facts and circumstances of this case because the finding of acquittal recorded by learned trial Court is perverse and there are compelling and substantial reasons for reversing the judgment of the learned trial Court because the impugned judgment is clearly unreasonable. Relevant and convincing materials have been unjustifiably eliminated by the learned trial Court. He has ignored the incriminating evidence in taking into consideration to reach a logical conclusion. 34. The paramount consideration of the Court should be to avoid miscarriage of justice. A miscarriage of justice which may arise from the acquittal of guilty is no less than from the conviction of an innocent. In a case where the trial Court has taken a view based upon conjectures and hypothesis and not on the legal evidence, a duty is cast upon the High Court to re-appreciate the evidence in acquittal appeal for the purposes of ascertaining as to whether the accused has committed any offence or not. Probable view taken by the trial Court, which may not be disturbed in the appeal, is such a view, which is based upon legal and admissible evidence. Only because the accused has been acquitted by the trial Court, cannot be made a basis to urge that the High Court under all circumstances should not disturb such a finding. The High Court would be justified in setting aside the acquittal when it is based upon surmises and conjectures. 35. Only because the accused has been acquitted by the trial Court, cannot be made a basis to urge that the High Court under all circumstances should not disturb such a finding. The High Court would be justified in setting aside the acquittal when it is based upon surmises and conjectures. 35. Finding of learned trial Court is based on conjecture and surmises that since Chandra Bhan, P.W. 1 is a child witness, therefore, it would not be safe to base conviction on his evidence and since Bhagwan Singh, P.W. 2 is related to him, therefore, his evidence should be discarded and benefit of doubt should be extended to accused. 36. We are of the view that when the acquittal by the trial Court is found on the basis of unwarranted assumptions and manifestly erroneous appreciation of evidence by ignoring valuable and credible evidence resulting in serious and substantial miscarriage of justice, the High Court’s interference would be justified. When the trial Court has overlooked the important aspects of the case and has handled the evidence in a most unreasonable manner and reached the conclusion as it did on unsustainable grounds, the view of evidence taken by the trial Court is manifestly erroneous and reasons assigned are utterly unsustainable. The trial Court’s judgment being perverse is liable to be set aside. When the the reasoning is based on surmises and conjectures acquittal can be reversed. The jurisdiction of the appellate Court in dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal is circumscribed by the limitation that no interference is to be made with the order of acquittal unless the approach made by the lower Court to the consideration of the evidence in the case is vitiated by some manifest illegality or the conclusion recorded by the Court below is such which could not have been possible arrived at by any Court acting reasonable and judiciously and is, therefore, liable to be characterised as perverse. When the reasons and reasonings given by learned Session Judge are perverse and the evidence does not afford scope for two views, the High Court may reverse the order of acquittal. We are of the firm view that there has been manifest illegality in the approach of the trial Court in the matter of appreciation of evidence. The findings recorded by the trial Court are wholly unreasonable and there has been a resultant miscarriage of justice. We are of the firm view that there has been manifest illegality in the approach of the trial Court in the matter of appreciation of evidence. The findings recorded by the trial Court are wholly unreasonable and there has been a resultant miscarriage of justice. The finding of acquittal of the accused recorded by the learned trial Court deserves to be reversed. In the result Government appeal No. 1781 of 1983 is hereby allowed. We set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 2.5.1983 and reverse the finding of acquittal. Accused Gulfam, Hari Singh and Nathoo are held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302/34 I.P.C. they are convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, they are to further undergo a sentence of one year. Gulfam, Hari Singh and Nathoo are directed to surrender themselves before the Court of learned C.J.M., Badaun within a period of one month to serve out sentence awarded to them. In case, they do not surrender before him within a stipulated period, he shall commit them to jail by issuing process in accordance with law, to serve out the sentence under the intimation to the Registry of this Court. Registry is directed to send the copy of this judgment to the Court of learned C.J.M., Baduan for compliance. ————