Judgment : Per Sureshwar Thakur, Judge 1. These appeals are directed against the judgment rendered on 4.3.2013 by the learned Sessions Judge, Una, H.P. in Sessions Case No. 1 of 2009, whereby the appellants/convicts Ravi Kumar, Rohit Dhingra, Santokh Ram alias Sokha, Narinder alias Sodhi, Dharminder alias Sonu and Brij Mohan alias Billa have been sentenced to imprisonment for life for theirs having committed offences under Section 302 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code alongwith fine of Rs.20,000/- each. In default of payment of fine the convicts have been sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for two years. The above said convicts have been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for theirs having committed offence under Section 396 read with Section 120-B of the IPC and fine of Rs.10,000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they have been sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for two years. Convicts Sukhwinder @ Kala and Vivek Kumar Tandon were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each for offence under Section 411 IPC. In default of payment of fine they have been sentenced to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. However, all the sentences imposed upon the accused aforesaid were ordered to run concurrently. 2. The prosecution story, in brief, is that on 13.09.2008 Balbir Singh while returning after collecting grass, noticed a dead body in “Nullah” of Harda Jungle District Una (H.P.) and he reported the matter to the police at Police Post Pandoga. On receipt of said information ASI Atul Kumar entered rapat No.11 of 13.9.2008 comprised in Ext.PW-28/A and visited the spot. He got clicked photographs of dead body and place of occurrence. Dead body of deceased was searched and a driving licence and voter’s ID-Card during the search of the dead body were recovered. On the basis of aforesaid documents, police came to know that dead body was of Dilbagh Singh son of Nand Singh, resident of Srai Khas, District Jalandhar, Punjab. After preparing the inquest report Exts. PW-17/A and Ext.PW-17/B the dead body was sent for autopsy to the Regional Hospital, Una. Dr. Y.R.Rabi, Medical Officer, Regional Hospital, Una on 14.9.2009 conducted post mortem examination of the body of deceased Dilbagh Singh and issued PMR Ext.PW-20/A. The viscera of the deceased was preserved by the doctors and after sealing it handed over to the police. PW-17/A and Ext.PW-17/B the dead body was sent for autopsy to the Regional Hospital, Una. Dr. Y.R.Rabi, Medical Officer, Regional Hospital, Una on 14.9.2009 conducted post mortem examination of the body of deceased Dilbagh Singh and issued PMR Ext.PW-20/A. The viscera of the deceased was preserved by the doctors and after sealing it handed over to the police. As per prosecution, dead body of deceased Dilbag Singh was further sent to Tanda Medical College for further examination from Forensic Expert for ascertaining the cause of death. Forensic Expert of Tanda Medical College Dr. D.P.Swami conducted further post mortem examination of deceased Dilbag Singh and issued PMR NO. 77R/08 of 15.9.2008 Ext.PW-21/A. Dr. Swami also handed clothes, sandals and yellow cloth of deceased in sealed cover to the police. 3. The further story of the prosecution is that on 15.9.2009 Jarnail Singh PW-15 recorded his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Ext.PW-15/E to the police disclosing that Dilbag Singh deceased was his cousin brother. On 11.9.2008 at about 3.30 p.m. said Dilbag Singh had taken Jarnail Singh’s Innova car bearing No. PB-08-BC-4042 from Rahimpur. On 13.9.2008 he received information from police post Pandoga about the recovery of dead body of Dilbag Singh. Thereafter Jarnail Singh made local inquiries and he came to know that on 11.9.2008 the deceased had received 4-5 telephone calls on his mobile from mobile No. 99884-94105 w.e.f. 5 p.m. to 10.30 p.m. On further inquiry by Jarnail Singh he came to know that the said mobile connection sim was sold by one Munish son of Jagdish, Seth Telecommunication, Kartarpur on 11.9.2008 to an unknown person without any I.D.Proof. He also disclosed that the deceased was last seen on 11.9.2008 at 5.30 p.m at Kartarpur and raised his apprehension that the calling number person might have committed the murder of deceased with the help of his companions and taken away the Innova Car. On the basis of the aforesaid statement of Jarnail Singh, F.I.R. No. 219/08 of 15.9.2008 comprised in Ext.PW-1/B under Sections 302, 364 and 392 IPC was registered at Police Station, Haroli, District Una, H.P. 4. During investigation ASI Atul Kumar on 16.9.2008 visited the spot and prepared site plan Ext.PW-28/C. The viscera of the deceased was sent for examination to FSL, Junga. During investigation ASI Atul Kumar on 16.9.2008 visited the spot and prepared site plan Ext.PW-28/C. The viscera of the deceased was sent for examination to FSL, Junga. During investigation, it was found that on 11.9.2008 accused Ravi Kumar was also accompanying the person who had talked to the deceased at Bus Stand, Kartarpur. On 25.9.2008 accused Ravi Kumar, Rohit Dhingra, Brij Mohan @ Billa and one Deepak Rai @ Bhatt were arrested. On 27.09.2008 accused Ravi Kumar made a disclosure statement under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act Ext.PW-5/B, pursuant to which he got recovered clothes i.e. shirt Ext.P-2, Pant Ext.P-3, Lower Ext.P-4, Chappal Ext.P-5 and Bag Ext.P1 of deceased Dilbag Singh from the house of Ashok Kumar and the same were taken into possession by the police vide memo Ext.PW-5/A. Site plan Ext.PW-34/A was also prepared on the spot. On 27.9.2008 pursuant to disclosure statement Ext.PW- 9/A under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act, made by accused Brij Mohan @ Billa, one amplifier Ext.P-6, T.V.screen Ext.P-7 and stereo Ext.P-8 of the aforesaid Innova vehicle were recovered from the house of accused Sukhwinder Singh @ Kala at Paharganj, Delhi and the same were taken into possession by the police vide memo Ext.PW-9/C. The site plan Ext.PW-29/A was also prepared by the Investigating Officer. On 28.09.2008 accused Sukhwinder Singh @ Kala was also arrested for offence under Section 411 IPC. Thereafter, on 27.9.2008 accused Rohit Dhingra identified the place of occurrence where he alongwith Sukha, Sodhi, Sonu and Ravi Kumar had allegedly murdered Dilbagh Singh on the intervening night of 11/12.9.2008 and thrown his dead body and to this effect memo Ext.PW-16/A as well as site plan were prepared. 5. During the Course of investigation, on 30.9.2008 statement of Sohan Singh owner of Tea stall at Pir Nigah was recorded. He disclosed that the accused persons had taken tea in his stall at Mid night on 11.9.2008. He identified co-accused Ravi Kumar and Rohit Dhingra, who were accompanied by 3-4 other boys on the aforesaid night. On 30.9.2008 the police proceeded to the house of Vivek Kumar Tandon to whom the said Innova vehicle was allegedly sold. During investigation the police came to know that the said Innova vehicle was found abandoned by the police of Punjab at Lalroo. On 30.9.2008 the police proceeded to the house of Vivek Kumar Tandon to whom the said Innova vehicle was allegedly sold. During investigation the police came to know that the said Innova vehicle was found abandoned by the police of Punjab at Lalroo. As per prosecution on 23.10.2008 at the instance of accused Narinder @ Sodhi and Darminder @ Sonu the place of occurrence was demarcated and to this effect demarcation memo Ext.PW10/D as well as spot map Ext.PW-28/G were prepared. During investigation police obtained the call details of mobile in the name of accused Ravi Kumar and of the deceased and call details Ext.PW-25/A of mobile No.99884-94105 bearing same IMEI No. of hand set used by accused Ravi kumar. As per call details of mobile No. 99884-94105, a call was made on the mobile number of the deceased whereafter the deceased was found to have left for Kartarpur. The original number of accused Ravi Kumar was not found in use on 11.9.2008 from 3.37 p.m. and the said phone number was used by him only on 12.9.2008 at 1.23 p.m. The mobile phone of the deceased was found not in use w.e.f. 10.43 onwards on 11.9.2008 and at that time its location was in Chintpurni area (Himachal circle). 6. Further as per the statements of the witnesses and call details it came in the investigation that on 10.09.2008 accused Santokh Ram @ Sokha, Narinder @ Sodhi, Dharminder @ Sonu, Ravi Kumar and Rohit Dhingra gathered on the terrace of the house of accused Brij Mohan @ Billa and hatched conspiracy to commit theft of Innova vehicle and accused Brij Mohan @ Billa paid them Rs.3000/- to accomplish the aforesaid task. Thereafter, accused Santokh Ram @ Sokha, Narinder @ Sodhi, Dharminder @ Sonu, Ravi Kumar and Rohit Dhingra had gone to Kartarpur from Phillaur. At Kartarpur Santokh Singh sent Narinder, Dharminder and Rohit Dhingra to Sheetla Mata Mandir at Kartarpur and he alongwith Ravi Kumar had gone to the shop of Seth Enterprises, Kartarpur and purchased Vodafone connection No. 99884-94105. Thereafter, while calling on his mobile phone they called deceased Dilbag Singh to Sheetla Mata Mandir. Thereafter, all the five aforesaid accused persons boarded the vehicle to Baba Bad Bhag Singh via Gagret. On the same night from Baba Bad Bhag Singh they went to Pir Nigaha. Thereafter, while calling on his mobile phone they called deceased Dilbag Singh to Sheetla Mata Mandir. Thereafter, all the five aforesaid accused persons boarded the vehicle to Baba Bad Bhag Singh via Gagret. On the same night from Baba Bad Bhag Singh they went to Pir Nigaha. At Pir Nigaha they took Coke and as per prosecution case accused Dharminder Singh added six sleeping pills in the coke served to the deceased but it yielded no effect. During the intervening night of 11th and 12th September, 2008 at about 2. a.m., they went from Pir Nigaha towards Hoshiarpur. On the way when they came across Hirda jungle ahead of Pandoga, accused Santokh Singh got stopped the vehicle on the pretext of vomiting and alighted from the vehicle. Deceased Dilbag Singh after checking the air pressure of the tyres again sat on the driver seat. At that time Dharmender accused was sitting on the rear seat, with the help of yellow colour scarf choked the throat of the deceased and pulled it back. Since Dilbagh Singh was powerful, when Sonu could not pull him, Rohit Dhingra helped Sonu to pull the Scarf backward. Both hands of Dilbagh Singh were caught hold by accused Santokh Ram and his co-accused Ravi Kumar. Narinder had closed the mouth and pressed the neck of the deceased. After some time Dilbag Singh lost the senses and fell on the left side of his seat. He was dragged out by accused Santokh Ram, Rohit Dhingra, Narinder and Ravi Kumar and was thrown into the gorge. Thereafter, accused Santokh Ram took charge of driving and fled away alongwith his co-accused from the spot. On the way, accused Santokh Ram @ Sokha destroyed the sim card of the deceased driver. On 12.9.2008 in morning all of them went to co-accused Brij Mohan at Phillaur and from there they alongwith Brij Mohan went to Yamunnagar in the robbed vehicle. They took out the clothes and slippers of deceased from the dickey of Innova vehicle and kept the same with Ashok Kumar brother of Brij Mohan. On 14.09.2008 accused Santokh Singh, Narinder, Dharminder, Brij Mohan and Rohit Dhingra went to the house of Sukhwinder Singh in Paharganj at Delhi via Yamunnagar, U.P. in the aforesaid Innova vehicle. They took out the clothes and slippers of deceased from the dickey of Innova vehicle and kept the same with Ashok Kumar brother of Brij Mohan. On 14.09.2008 accused Santokh Singh, Narinder, Dharminder, Brij Mohan and Rohit Dhingra went to the house of Sukhwinder Singh in Paharganj at Delhi via Yamunnagar, U.P. in the aforesaid Innova vehicle. As per prosecution when accused aforesaid could not sell the vehicle, it was left with said Sukhwinder Singh accused and returned back to village Nurmahal. Accused Sukhwinder Singh removed stereo, amplifier alongwith T.V Screen from the Innova vehicle and kept the aforesaid articles in his possession. On 17.9.2008 accused persons Brij Mohan, Santokh Ram, Narinder, Dharmender with one Deepak Rai again went to Delhi in Innova No.PB-08-BB-7878. In Paharganj at Delhi they contacted through Deepak Rai his sister’s husband namely Sanjeev Kumar. They sold the robbed Innova vehicle through Sanjeev Rai in East Patel Nagar, Delhi to one Vivek Kumar Tandon only for Rs.13,500/-. When accused Vivek Kumar Tandon came to know about the arrest of his coaccused person, he removed the vehicle from Delhi and abandoned the same in Lalroo area of Punjab. Thereafter challan under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. was prepared and filed in the Court 7. The trial Court charged the accused Ravi Kumar, Rohit Dhingra, Santokh Ram @ Sokha, Narinder @ Sodhi, Dharminder @ Sonu, Brij Mohan @ Billa under Sections 396 and 302 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, accused Sukhwinder Singh @ Kala under Section 411 of the IPC and accused Vivek Kumar Tandon under Sections 411 and 201 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 8. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined as many as 36 witnesses. On closure of the prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. were recorded, in which they pleaded innocence. In defence, accused Ravi Kumar , Brij Mohan and Rohit Dhingra have tendered certified copy of challan Ex. D-1. Accused Sukhwinder Singh tendered in his defence copy of judgment Ex. D-Z. The other accused did not choose to lead evidence in defence. Supplementary statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded to which they did not choose to lead evidence in defence. 9. On appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court returned findings of conviction against the accused/appellants. 10. D-Z. The other accused did not choose to lead evidence in defence. Supplementary statements of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C were recorded to which they did not choose to lead evidence in defence. 9. On appraisal of the evidence on record, the learned trial Court returned findings of conviction against the accused/appellants. 10. The appellants are aggrieved by the judgment of conviction, recorded by the learned trial Court. The learned counsel for the appellants, have concertedly and vigorously contended that the findings of conviction, recorded by the learned trial Court, are not based on a proper appreciation of the evidence on record, rather, they are sequelled by gross misappreciation of the material on record. Hence, they contend that the findings of conviction be reversed by this Court, in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and be replaced by findings of acquittal. 11. On the other hand, the learned Additional Advocate General, has, with considerable force and vigour, contended that the findings of conviction, recorded by the Court below, are based on a mature and balanced appreciation of evidence on record and do not necessitate interference, rather merit vindication. 12. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side, has with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record. 13. The prosecution attributes to the accused an inculpatory role of theirs having strangulated the deceased, hence, begotten his demise. For the aforesaid cause of the demise of the deceased to attain success, it necessitates its being grooved in the apt and germane evidence, comprised in the testimonies of PWs 20 and 21 and theirs displaying the factum of the demise of the deceased having ensued on account of the deceased having come to be strangulated. In case, the evidence of PWs 20 and 21 forthrightly brings to the fore the factum of theirs having, while conducting the post mortem on the body of the deceased, observed symptoms thereon in synchronization with the prescriptive edicts enunciated in Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology for succoring, a conclusion that as such, the prosecution version of the accused having begotten the demise of the deceased by strangulating him, which when construed in entwinement with or in conjunction with the other links formidably proved by the adduction of cogent evidence, would stand firmly establish and clinch the guilt of the accused. However, in the event of, the testimonies of PWs 20 and 21 refraining to portray a disclosure of theirs noticing any symptom on the body of the deceased as subjected to post mortem by them, communicative of the deceased having come to be strangulated, as a corollary then the attribution of an inculpatory role to the accused by the prosecution, of theirs having begotten the demise of the deceased by strangulating him would falter. In the eventuality of the prosecution case, hence coming to stagger and falter the factum of proof at the instance of the prosecution of other links in the chain of circumstances, though may be a pointer to the factum of theirs pronouncing the guilt of the accused nonetheless proof thereof would stand dislodged as well as overwhelmed by the factum of the prosecution having not proved the prime or the anchor link in the entire chain of circumstances comprised in its lending invincible and forthright proof qua the cause of demise of the deceased. In other words, absence of evidence both cogent and worthy conveying the factum of the deceased having been strangulated by the accused would hence subsume the effect of proof at the instance of the prosecution of other links in the chain of circumstances, besides would also render the proof qua substantiation of other links in the chain of circumstances, to wane. Moreover, proof of other links in the chain of circumstances would also be concomitantly construed to be a concoction or well an engineered contrivance at the instance of the investigating officer to falsely implicate the accused. 14. Now for determining whether the prosecution has been able to adduce potent proof qua the canvassed fact of the accused having strangulated the deceased, an advertence to the testimonies of PWs 20 and 21, is imperative. PW-20, who conducted the postmortem on the body of the deceased on 14.09.2008 and has proved the postmortem report comprised in Ext.PW-20/A, has therein recorded the following observations:- “…….. on receipt of the report of Chemical Examiner my opinion was traces of ethyl alcohol detected in Exts. P-1, P-2, and P-3 but the cause of death could not be ascertained because of advance stage of decomposition of the dead body.” 15. on receipt of the report of Chemical Examiner my opinion was traces of ethyl alcohol detected in Exts. P-1, P-2, and P-3 but the cause of death could not be ascertained because of advance stage of decomposition of the dead body.” 15. In his examination in chief he has pronounced the fact, that on receipt of the report of the chemical examiner wherein the latter had opined qua the existence of traces of ethyl alcohol in exhibits sent to him for examination the cause of death of the deceased, arising from the advanced stage of decomposition of the dead body, was unascertainable. The opinion of PW-20 is comprised in Ext.PW-20/B. The sequelling effect of the deposition of PW-20 comprised in his examination-in-chief wherein he has explicitly voiced the factum of his being on account of the advanced stage of decomposition of the body of the deceased disabled to pronounce with definitiveness or conclusiveness upon the cause of demise of the deceased, is that, hence as a natural corollary, it fosters the deduction that in the first instance on 14.09.2008 the cause of the demise of the deceased remained unascertained or unpronounced by the doctor who subjected the body of the deceased, to post mortem. The further obvious inference which is ensuable is that hence on the strength of deposition of PW-20 the prosecution cannot gain any succor or sinew in propagating before this Court that the accused had strangulated the deceased, rather the converse inference which sprouts is that espousal by the prosecution of an inculpatory role being attributable to the accused arising from theirs having strangulated the deceased, faces enfeeblement besides stands negated. However, the prosecution subsequently on 15.9.2008 solicited the services of PW-21 for his carrying out a post mortem examination on the body of the deceased. He in his examination in chief has candidly and bluntly voiced the factum of his noticing no evidence or symptoms of strangulation existing thereon for hence conveying that the demise of the deceased was sequelled by strangulation or hanging. He in his examination in chief has candidly and bluntly voiced the factum of his noticing no evidence or symptoms of strangulation existing thereon for hence conveying that the demise of the deceased was sequelled by strangulation or hanging. He too in his final opinion in conformity with the final opinion rendered by PW-20 has concluded that no definitive opinion with aplomb could be rendered about the demise of the deceased especially in the face of the advanced decomposition of the dead body and its acting as a deterrent to the according of a conclusive opinion qua the demise of the deceased. Even though, in his examination in chief he has pronounced the fact that if the ligature material is removed immediately the mark of strangulation would not appear on the dead body, especially when it is in an advanced stage of decomposition. He has also recorded in his examination in chief the factum that he noticed blood on the shirt and Pajama of the deceased which constrained him to voice the fact that as such there was possibility of the death of the deceased arising from smothering and strangulation. However, he has admitted the factum that he did not observe any bone of the relevant and apt portion purportedly subjected to strangulation or smothering by the accused having suffered any fracture. Even when the emanation in the examination in chief of PW-21 qua the fact of his having noticed blood on the front side of shirt and Pajama of the deceased as also his having divulged in his examination in chief, the fact that the absence of ligature marks on the portion subjected to strangulation may not appear, to connote the factum of the victim having come to be strangulated, especially when the ligature material stands removed immediately after performing the act of strangulation by the accused, as also when the body of the deceased is in an advanced stage of decomposition, arouses the possible inference that the demise of the deceased was occasioned by smothering and strangulation, yet it, for the reasons assigned hereinafter, stands obfuscated or waned. (a) his having in consonance with the deposition of PW- 20 underscored the fact of an inability on his part to form a conclusive and definitive opinion qua the cause of demise of the deceased, arising from the fact of the advanced stage of decomposition of the body of the deceased. Further more, when the emanation in his examination-in-chief portraying the possible fact of the deceased having been subjected to strangulation or smothering stands not reflected in his final opinion, existence thereof in his examination in chief can be attributed to have sprouted only on account of his being prodded by the learned PP to engineer or concoct a deposition in tandem with the espousal by the prosecution of the deceased having been put to death by the accused by strangulating or smothering him. Obviously an invented or conjured opinion existing in the examination-in-chief of PW-21, cannot especially when it has remained un-recorded in his final opinion, foment any inference from this Court that hence the propagation by the prosecution of the deceased having been put to death by strangulation or smothering attains any probative vigor and sinew. (b). Even otherwise, it appears that when PW-20 had omitted to assign any definite opinion qua the demise of the deceased which fact came to be concurred in the opinion rendered by PW- 21, the prosecution to somehow sustain its version qua the deceased having been strangulated or smothered by the accused, by tutoring PW-21 concerted to elicit from him an opinion in consonance with its espousal, of the accused having strangulated or smothered the deceased. Naturally, a prodded or tutored version by PW-21 vainly attributing therein the cause of demise arising from smothering and strangulation, is both infirm as well as legally frail. 15. Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology 23rd Edition at Page 584 explicitly communicates the symptoms indicative of strangulation. The preeminent symptoms connoting strangulation are: (a) bleeding from the nose, mouth and ears. (b) Injury to the muscles of the neck. (c) Subcutaneous tissues under the mark-Ecchymosed. (d) Occurrence of fracture of the larynx and trachea besides hyoid bone. 16. 15. Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology 23rd Edition at Page 584 explicitly communicates the symptoms indicative of strangulation. The preeminent symptoms connoting strangulation are: (a) bleeding from the nose, mouth and ears. (b) Injury to the muscles of the neck. (c) Subcutaneous tissues under the mark-Ecchymosed. (d) Occurrence of fracture of the larynx and trachea besides hyoid bone. 16. Post mortem reports, furnished by both PW-20 and 21 as also their concurrent opinions articulative of no conclusive and definitive opinion emanable qua the cause of the demise of the deceased which aforesaid lack of conclusivity of opinion has been expressed to be arising from the advanced decomposition of the body, besides portray non existence of the hereinabove characteristic symptomatic features on the body of the deceased subjected to post mortem by each of them for tellingly, patently, candidly and forthrightly bespeaking of the demise of the deceased having stood begotten by strangulation. Naturally then the apt inference, is that it can be formidably concluded by this Court, that the features, enunciated in Modi’s Medical Jurisprudence and Toxicology 23rd Edition extracted hereinabove, for connoting the factum of the deceased having come to be put to death by strangulation by the accused, when not found existing on the body of the deceased, as such, as a natural corollary an invincible conclusion is that the espousal by the prosecution of the deceased having been put to death by his being strangulated by the accused is not sustainable. 17. The further links in the chain of circumstances which had been concluded by the learned trial Court to be leading to the inference of the prosecution having proved the guilt of the accused are:- 1. “On 11.9.2008 at about 4.30 p.m. at Taxi Stand, Kartarpur accused Ravi Kumar and Santokh Singh spoke to Dilbag Singh for 10 minutes for hiring vehicle and took him alognwith them where after deceased was not seen alive by anybody. 2. On 11.9.2008 deceased Dilbagh Singh was contacted on his mobile No. 9872591771 several times between 5:43 to 10:43 from phone No. 9988494105 with IMEI No. 356269014835920 of hand set of Ravi Kumar accused. 3. 2. On 11.9.2008 deceased Dilbagh Singh was contacted on his mobile No. 9872591771 several times between 5:43 to 10:43 from phone No. 9988494105 with IMEI No. 356269014835920 of hand set of Ravi Kumar accused. 3. A day earlier to taking the deceased to Himachal Pradesh accused persons Santokh Ram @ Sokha, Narinder @ Sodhi, Ravi Kumar, Rohit Dhingra and Dharminder @ Sonu gathered on the terrace of the house of accused Brij Mohan @ Billa and showed their intention to have a new vehicle. 4. Recovery of dead body of deceased Dilbagh Singh in a decomposed state on 13.9.2008 with abrasions on both elbows and blood stained froth in mouth showing that death of deceased was not natural but homicidal. 5. Recovery of clothes and slippers of deceased from Yamunanagar at the instance of accused Ravi Kumar. 6. Recovery of amplifier, stereo and TV Screen of robbed vehicle at the instance of Brij Mohan @ Billa accused from the house of Sukhwinder Singh @ Kala at Delhi. 7. On 18.9.2008 accused Brij Mohan @ Billa, Santokh Singh @ Sukha, Dharminder @ Sonu , Narinder @ Sodhi alongwith Sukhwinder Singh @ Kala Sold robbed Innove vehicle to V.K Tondon. 8. That on 27.9.2008 robbed Innova vehicle No. PB- 08-BC-4042 was found in abandoned state by the side of Ambala-Chandigarh highway in the jurisdiction of Police Station, Lalru.” 18. With this Court having formed an opinion that the espousal by the prosecution of the deceased having been subjected to death by the purported inculpatory act of the accused having strangulated him, stands faltered as well as staggered, obviously then, when the primadonna and preeminent link in the chain of circumstances constituted in the fact of cause of the demise of the deceased necessitating or warranting invincible proof, for reasons hereinabove rather stands disproved, the effect of disproof of the primadonna and preeminent link in the chain of circumstances is that it subsumes as well as overwhelms the effect of proof, if any, of other links by the prosecution in the chain of circumstances, besides rendering them to be contrived or engineered by the investigating officer to falsely implicate the accused. 19. Moreover, the aforesaid links in the chain of circumstances get severed in the face of the findings recorded herein above communicating the factum of the Investigating Officer having contrived and engineered a false story to falsely implicate the accused. 19. Moreover, the aforesaid links in the chain of circumstances get severed in the face of the findings recorded herein above communicating the factum of the Investigating Officer having contrived and engineered a false story to falsely implicate the accused. As such, a calculated machination on the part of the Investigating Officer to falsely implicate the accused stands established. The articles mentioned at Sr. No. 5, for the reasons hereinabove, can hence be concluded to be not belonging to the deceased especially when they are easily procurable from the market, resultantly causing the prosecution case to stagger. Further more, the recovery of Innova car found in an abandoned state by the side of Ambala-Chandigarh highway, noway helps the prosecution story to propagate the guilt of the accused. Moreover, the evidence of the accused being last seen with the deceased, also suffers effacement. 20. The summum bonum of the above discussion is that the prosecution has not been able to adduce cogent and emphatic evidence in proving the guilt of the accused. The appreciation of the evidence as done by the learned trial Court suffers from an infirmity as well as perversity. Consequently, reinforcingly, it can be formidably concluded, that, the findings of the learned trial Court merit interference. 16. In view of above discussion, the appeals are allowed and the impugned judgment of 4.3.2013, rendered by the learned Sessions Judge, Una, is set aside. The appellants/accused are acquitted of the offence charged. The fine amount, if any, deposited by the accused is ordered to be refunded to them. Since the accused are in jail, they be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. 21. The Registry is directed to prepare the release warrants of the accused and send the same to the Superintendent of the jail concerned, in conformity with the judgment forthwith. Records be sent forthwith.