JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Nelson Sailo, J These two criminal appeals are filed against the Judgment and Order dated 14.8.2013 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Karimganj in Sessions Case No.53 of 2012 convicting and sentencing the three accused persons under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- each and in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1 (one) month. 2. Out of the three convicted persons, two of them i.e., Amiruddin and Abdul Khalique filed their appeals from jail and they are commonly registered as Criminal Appeal (J) No.115 of 2013. The other appeal is filed by the convict accused Abdul Khalique through his engaged counsel and is registered as Criminal Appeal No.324 of 2013. Since all the three accused persons having been convicted and sentenced by a common judgment, both the appeals are taken up together for disposal. The convicted persons for convenience will be referred to as the appellants hereafter. 3. The case of the prosecution is that an FIR was lodged by Musstt. Aiyana Bibi, wife of the deceased Sarkum Ali on 24.8.2008 before the Officer in-charge of Cheragi P.P. under the Ratabari Police Station stating that on 23.8.2008, her two daughters went to the house of one Tena Khasia at Khasia Punji to work in his betel leaf plantation and around 8 p.m., her husband left home to fetch them. Thereafter, around 12 midnight when her husband was coming home with one of their daughter Aklima Begum, she heard the cry of her husband and she therefore rushed out of the house and saw her daughter Aklima Begum running back towards their house and informing her that the appellants had attacked her father and after assaulting him with lathi, they left him in an unconscious state. She then rushed to the spot with her daughter and found her husband lying half dead on the ground. He was profusely bleeding from his head, hand, belly and waistline. She and her daughter somehow managed to bring him home in an unconscious and bleeding state. She therefore requested the police to make an investigation and take necessary action against the appellants who were named in the FIR. 4. He was profusely bleeding from his head, hand, belly and waistline. She and her daughter somehow managed to bring him home in an unconscious and bleeding state. She therefore requested the police to make an investigation and take necessary action against the appellants who were named in the FIR. 4. As a result, Ratabari PS Case No.80 of 2008 dated 24.8.2008 under Section 147/341/325 of the IPC was registered and Sri Sasanka Nath, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police was entrusted to take up the investigation. The victim Sri Sarkan Ali subsequently succumbed to his injury the next morning on 24.8.2008 and therefore, Section 302 IPC was added to the charge. The appellants on being committed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Karimganj before the Sessions Judge at Karimganj, charge under Section 302/34 of the IPC was framed against them and to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed for trial. During the trial, the prosecution examined as many as 9 prosecution witnesses while the accused appellants did not examine any defence witness. The appellants were also examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. 5. Appearing for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 324 of 2013, Mr. J.C. Barman, the learned counsel submits that the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Sessions Judge cannot be sustained primarily on the ground that the appellants have been convicted solely on the basis of a solitary witness i.e., PW-2 Aklima Begm who in fact is the daughter of the deceased. He submits that the evidence of the PW-2 having not been corroborated by other witnesses, his conviction cannot be sustained solely on her testimony. Mr. J.C.Barman further submits that the evidence led by PW-1 i.e. Musstt. Aeyana Begum, the wife of the deceased do not have any evidentiary value for convicting the appellant(s) in as much as her statement in the FIR she submitted and her deposition before the Court are absolutely contradictory. While in the FIR she contended that she was informed by her daughter PW-2 that the appellants attacked her husband, the deceased with lathi and left him in an unconscious state, in her deposition before the Court, she stated that she saw the appellant Fakkar (Fakar Uddin) assaulting her husband with a long dao at the backside of her husband. While in the FIR she contended that she was informed by her daughter PW-2 that the appellants attacked her husband, the deceased with lathi and left him in an unconscious state, in her deposition before the Court, she stated that she saw the appellant Fakkar (Fakar Uddin) assaulting her husband with a long dao at the backside of her husband. She also saw the accused appellant Abdul Khaleque assaulting her husband with a lathi while another person was found standing nearby. She further deposed that the appellant Noor Ahmed caught hold of her daughter Aklima at the time of the assault and upon seeing her, the appellants went away and entered into the house of Abdul Aziz, the father-in-law of the appellants. He therefore submits that with such contradictory statements of the PW-1 and the uncorroborated statements of the PW-2, the conviction of appellant(s) cannot be sustained. 6. Mr. J.C. Barman to substantiate his submissions relies upon the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Anil Phukan Vs. The State of Assam ( AIR 1993 SC 1462 ). Adverting to the said decision, he submits that conviction on the basis of the testimony of a sole eye-witness was held to be unreliable and therefore it was essential for an independent witness to corroborate the testimony of the sole eye witness. The Apex Court having found that there was no corroboration to the testimony of the sole witness, granted the accused therein the benefit of doubt and thus set aside the conviction and sentence for the offence which was also under Section 302/34 IPC. 7. Mr. J.C.Barman further relies upon the decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Lalu Manjhi & Anr. Vs. The State of Jharkhand AIR 2003 SC 854 . By referring to the said decision Mr. J.C. Barman submits that the Apex Court in the case of testimony of a single witness has classified the oral testimony into three categories viz; (i) wholly reliable (ii) wholly unreliable and (iii) neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. He submits that in the first two categories, there would be no difficulty in accepting and discarding the testimony of the single witness. He submits that in the first two categories, there would be no difficulty in accepting and discarding the testimony of the single witness. However, difficulty would arise in the third category where the Court would be required to circumspect and look for corroboration in material particulars by reliable testimony, direct or circumstantial before acting upon the testimony of a single witness. He therefore submits that besides the PW-2, there being no reliable witness, conviction solely on the basis of the testimony of PW-2 cannot be sustained. 8. Mr. J.C. Barman by referring to the post mortem report of the deceased submits that the external appearance of the deceased as per the said report indicates 2” X 1” abrasion over the left side of the forehead and 2” x 1” x ½” lacerated injury over the left side of the lower abdomen besides depression fracture of frontal bone underneath the injury on the forehead. Considering the case projected by the prosecution, wherein the deceased was said to have been assaulted with lathi and dao, the post mortem examination report otherwise does not support such version. Therefore, with such inconsistencies the learned Trial Court could not have convicted the appellant(s) and therefore, he submits that the conviction of the appellants is unsustainable. 9. Mr. J.C. Barman also submits that the investigation done by the case I.O. was most perfunctory in as much as no recovery of the alleged weapons used for attacking the deceased were recovered by the police. The sketch map of the place of occurrence exhibited as Exhibit-3 and 3.1 is vague and do not explain and support the case of the prosecution. No materials were sent for the FSL opinion and therefore with such perfunctory investigation, the learned Trial Court could not have convicted the appellant(s). He also submits that since there are indication of their being an enmity between the family of the deceased and that of the accused appellants, the learned Trial Court having failed to consider and examine this aspect of the matter while convicting the appellants, the conviction is unsustainable. 10. Supporting the submission of Mr. J.C. Barman, Mr. S. Chamaria the learned Amicus Curiae submits that on appreciation of the evidence led by the prosecution witness, there is inconsistency, more particularly on the ocular evidence and the medical evidence. 10. Supporting the submission of Mr. J.C. Barman, Mr. S. Chamaria the learned Amicus Curiae submits that on appreciation of the evidence led by the prosecution witness, there is inconsistency, more particularly on the ocular evidence and the medical evidence. In this connection, he relies upon the decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Mahavir Singh Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2016)10 SCC 220 : AIR 2016 SC 5231 wherein the Apex Court adopting the ratio laid down in an earlier decision of Abdul Sayeed Vs. State of M.P. (2010)10 SCC 259 held that the position of law in cases where there is contradiction between medical evidence and ocular evidence can be crystallized to the effect that though the ocular testimony of a witness has greater evidentiary value vis-a-vis medical evidence, when medical evidence makes the ocular testimony improbable, that becomes a relevant factor in the process of the evaluation of evidence. However, where the medical evidence goes far that it completely rules out all possibility of the ocular evidence being true, the ocular evidence may be disbelieved. He submits that while according to prosecution witness, more particularly, PW-1 and 2, the accused appellants inflicted several blows with lathis and dao but the post mortem report indicate only two cut injuries i.e., one over the left side of the forehead and the second over the left side of lower abdomen besides depression of fracture of the frontal bone below the forehead. He therefore submits that the deposition of the PW-1 and PW-2 are only unreliable in order to convict the accused appellants. 11. Mr. S Chamaria, the learned Amicus Curiae further relies upon the Apex Court’s decision rendered in the case of Sunil Kumar Kundu & Anr. Vs. State of Jharkhand, (2013) 4 SCC 422 to contend that it is true that when there is cogent eye-witness, the medical evidence recedes in the background. However, when the eye- witness is totally inconsistent with the medical evidence and there is reason to believe that improvements are made in the court to bring the prosecution case in conformity with the post-mortem notes, it becomes a cause for concern. In such a situation, it is difficult to say that one must believe the tainted eye-witness’s account and keep the medical evidence aside. Mr. In such a situation, it is difficult to say that one must believe the tainted eye-witness’s account and keep the medical evidence aside. Mr. S Chamaria by refering to the Assam Police Manual, more particularly Clauses 134, 135, 174 and 195 amongst others, submits that the entire investigation conducted by the police was most perfunctory and there were major lapses on their part in not securing the alleged weapon used upon the deceased, collection of blood stains/samples and its examination by an expert etc. Citing the decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Suresh Chandra Jana & Ors. Vs. State of West Bengal & Ors. MANU/SC/0997/2017, he submits that the Apex Court held that although Courts are provided with a duty to dispense justice, it cannot be denied that effective dispensation of justice in this country requires the support of all stake holders. Therefore, every stake holders are expected to be aware of their responsibility and work towards achieving ends of the criminal justice system. He further submits that as held by the Apex Court, if a negligent investigation or omission or lapses due to perfunctory investigation are not effectively rectified, the faith and confidence of the people in the law enforcing agency would be shaken. Therefore, the police have to demonstrate utmost diligence, seriousness and promptness. He submits that even in the case at hand, the Investigating Agency had ignored the relevant provision for conducting investigation as prescribed by the Assam Police Manual. Therefore, conviction of the appellants under such circumstance is not sustainable. 12. Ms. B Bhuyan, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State submits that the evidence led by the prosecution witnesses, more particularly, PWs-1, 2 and 4 clearly establish the case of the prosecution which has led to the conviction of the appellants. She submits that PW-2 who is the daughter of the deceased was with her father at the time of the incident. In her examination-in-chief she clearly stated that while she and her father were returning back from the house of Tena Khasia, appellant Fakar Uddin suddenly with a sharp edged lathi inflicted hurt on the head of her father. Abdul Khaleque followed suit and started inflicting injuries with dao while Amir Uddin and Noor Ahmed caught hold of her. After releasing her, Amir Uddin and Noor Ahmed also assaulted her father with their lathi and dagger. Abdul Khaleque followed suit and started inflicting injuries with dao while Amir Uddin and Noor Ahmed caught hold of her. After releasing her, Amir Uddin and Noor Ahmed also assaulted her father with their lathi and dagger. She then rushed towards her home and she saw her mother running down from their tilla land. That she and her mother took her injured father towards the house. Referring to the deposition of PW-1 Ms. B Bhuyan submits that the witness who is the wife of the deceased upon hearing the alarm raised by her husband and her daughter Aklima rushed towards the place of occurrence and saw the accused person assaulting her husband. She saw Fakkar with long dao inflicting hurt on the backside of her husband while Abdul Khalaque assaulted him with a lathi while the others were standing near them. She saw the accused persons with the torchlight which she carried. Noor Ahmed had got hold of her daughter Aklima while her husband was being assaulted and the accused persons upon seeing her went away and entered into the house of Abdul Aziz, the father-in-law of all the accused persons. She then with the help of her daughter managed to take her husband away to their house. PW-4 Akrum Ali who is the elder brother of the deceased deposed before the Court that Ayesha Begum, the wife of the deceased after the incident came to his house and woke him up weeping and reported that her husband was assaulted by some people and saying that she rushed towards the police station. In the morning, he went to the house of the deceased and found the deceased lying unconsciousness with the injury mark on his head by the side of his ear and many other parts of the body. On making enquiry, Aklima Begum, the daughter of the deceased told him that on the night before the accused persons, namely, Abdul Khaleque, Amir and Fakar assaulted her father. He along with one Alimuddin and others took the injured to Cheragi out-post whereafter, the police sent the deceased to Dulabcherra PHC. The doctor of Dulabcherra PHC referred the deceased to Karimganj Civil Hospital and it was on the way to the hospital the deceased succumbed to his injury. 13. Ms. He along with one Alimuddin and others took the injured to Cheragi out-post whereafter, the police sent the deceased to Dulabcherra PHC. The doctor of Dulabcherra PHC referred the deceased to Karimganj Civil Hospital and it was on the way to the hospital the deceased succumbed to his injury. 13. Ms. B Bhuyan, further submits that the PW-5 Alim Uddin who is the cousin brother of Fakar Uuddin, one of the accused appellant in his deposition before the Court stated that on the date of the incident, he met the three accused persons coming from beneath the tilla land of the deceased Sarkum Ali. On making a query to the accused Fakar Uddin, he told him that he assaulted Sakrum Ali, the deceased. When he went to the house of the deceased, he found him lying injured with blood coming out. He saw the PW-1 and PW-2 near the Surkum Ali and on his query, the other told him that accused Fakar Uddin, Amir Uddin and Abdul Khaleque had inflicted the injuries. That in addition to the four witness, Ms. B Bhuyan submits that although PW-3 and PW-6 have been declared as hostile by the prosecution during trial, fact remain that evidence led by the six witnesses clearly confirm a chain indicating the culpability of the accused appellants. In so far the variance in FIR alleged by the learned counsel for the appellants, the same cannot discredit the case of the prosecution in as much as the FIR is only an instrument to set the investigation of the police in motion. She submits that the evidence led by PW-1, 2, 4 and 5 otherwise has not been shaken during their cross-examination and therefore the involvement of the accused/appellants for causing death of the deceased is established beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the learned Trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants and the same does not call for the interference by this Court. By referring to the post mortem report, Ms. B Bhuyan submits that the nature of injury found on the body of the deceased is similar to the statements made by the prosecution witnesses, more particularly PW- 1 and PW-2. The statements of the said prosecution witnesses has clearly been corroborated by the findings recorded in the post mortem report and therefore, the guilt of the appellants has clearly been established. 14. Mr. The statements of the said prosecution witnesses has clearly been corroborated by the findings recorded in the post mortem report and therefore, the guilt of the appellants has clearly been established. 14. Mr. B Bhuyan further submits that the discrepancy in the evidence are in fact only minor inconsistencies which otherwise cannot be the basis for rejecting the credibility of the prosecution evidence. Even the alleged lapses on the part of the Investigating Agency as contended by the opposite party cannot be a ground to vitiate the conviction. She submits that deficiency in the investigation by way of omission and lapses are bound to happen but that by itself cannot result in rejection of the prosecution’s case. In this connection, she relies upon the decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Sheo Shankar Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors. (2011) 3 SCC 654 , Sukhwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 12 SCC 490 , Yogesh Singh Vs. Mahavir Singh & Ors. (2017) Crl.L.J 291. She thus submits that from a perusal of the evidence led by the prosecution, it can be clearly seen that the prosecution have been able to bring home the guilt of the appellants and considering the heinous crime having committed by them, the learned Trial Court has rightly convicted and given them appropriate sentences. 15. We have heard the submissions advanced by the Ld. Counsels for the rival parties, perused the materials on record and the lower court records as well. 16. PW-1 who is the wife of the deceased and the complainant in her examination-in-chief deposed that all the accused persons were known to her and were from their locality. Her husband Sarkum Ali was a worker under Khasia people/community who dealt with paan leaves. She and her husband have five daughters and a son and one of their daughter was already married. The age of the eldest daughter was about 21 years while the youngest daughter about 5 years and son about 8 years. The other three daughters were aged about 12, 15 and 18 years respectively. She maintains her family from the wage she earns as a labourer under Khasia people. After the death of her husband, her children discontinued their studies. Relevant portion of her examination-in-chief may be abstracted as follows- “About five years back one day at about 10.30 pm the alleged incident took place. She maintains her family from the wage she earns as a labourer under Khasia people. After the death of her husband, her children discontinued their studies. Relevant portion of her examination-in-chief may be abstracted as follows- “About five years back one day at about 10.30 pm the alleged incident took place. Our homestead land is situated in a ‘tilla’ land surrounded by jungle. On that evening my two daughters namely- Kulsuma and Aklima went to the house of one Tena Khasia for work. Seeing their late, my husband went to the house of Tena Khasia for work. Seeing their late, my husband went to the house of Tena Khasia to bring my two daughters and on the way back with one daughter namely, Aklima, beneath our homestead ‘tilla’ on the northern side hearing alarm of my husband and my daughters went to the PO and saw the accused persons to assault my husband. I saw accused Fakar with a long ‘dao‘ to inflict hurt on the back side of my husband. Accused Abdul Khalique @ Khasia assaulted with a lathi and other was found standing near to them. I saw the accused persons on the light of my charger torch, which I carried with me at the time of going to the PO. My husband was also having 3 battery torch at that time. Accused Nur Ahmed caught hold of my daughter Akima at the time of assaulting of my husband. Seeing me, the accused persons went away and entered into the house of Abdul Aziz, the father-in-law of all the accused persons. Accused Nur Ahmed is the son of the said Abdul Aziz. After that many other gathered at the PO. I and my said daughter managed to take my husband to our house. I went to Cheragi Out-Post late night at 3 am. Subsequently, at the morning time, my husband was brought to the Cheragi Out-Post wherefrom he was referred to Dullavcherra PHC and again he was referred to Karimganj Civil Hospital. On the way to Karimganj, my husband succumbed to injury. Ejahar was written by Badar Uddin as per my dictation. I put thumb impression in the said ejahar. Police came to our house and recorded our statements. There was land dispute in between my husband and accused persons. On the way to Karimganj, my husband succumbed to injury. Ejahar was written by Badar Uddin as per my dictation. I put thumb impression in the said ejahar. Police came to our house and recorded our statements. There was land dispute in between my husband and accused persons. My husband purchased 5 kattas of land from one Afaz Ali, but the same was being under the possession of the accused persons and for that there had been a land dispute and enmity. There had been many ‘bichars’ in the village, but of no result. After taking my injured husband to our house, my husband was conscious and he told that accused Fakar first inflicted the injury and subsequently, the others inflicted injuries. He also told that he was assaulted for no any reason.” 17. PW-2 Aklima Begum who was with her father on the night of the incident in her examination-in-chief stated that on the date of the incident in the afternoon, she and her elder sister Kulsuma had gone to the house of Tena Khasia for sorting paan leaves. While they were working, their father came to fetch them and since there was work pending, here elder sister stayed back while she alongwith her father set out to return back home around 11 pm when below their tilla land, accused Fakar Uddin suddently with a sharp edged lathi inflicted hurt on the head of her father. Soon after, Abdul Kalique started inflicng injuries with dao upon her father while accused Amir Uddin, Nur Ahmed caught hold her. After some time when her father was beaten by the two other accused, she was released by accused Amir Uddin and Nur Ahmed who also began assaulting her father with their lathi and dagger. By that time while she rushed towards home, she saw her mother running down from their tilla land. She also raised alarm and then she with her mother went back to the PO where by that time, many others had gathered and their torch lit. Hearing their alarm, Alim Uddin the husband of her eldest sister also came to the PO but before that she and her mother managed to take her injured father home. Her mother then went to the police. Tena Khasia, Fakar and Makhan who came to their house managed to shift her injured father to the police station while she remained in the house. Her mother then went to the police. Tena Khasia, Fakar and Makhan who came to their house managed to shift her injured father to the police station while she remained in the house. After two days, her father’s dead body was brought back and she came to learn that her father on the way to Karimganj Civil Hospital had expired. After completion of burial, police came to their house and examined them. 18. Although the PW-3 was declared hostile, he deposed before the ld Trial Court as- “Deceased Sarkum Ali was of our neighbourhood. About 4/5 years back in one night at around 12-00 O’Clock while I was at my home, hearing alarm, I came out and went to the homestead of Sarkum Ali. I found there Sarkum Ali was lying unconscious with injuries. His children were around him. At that time the wife of Sarkum Ali was not there. At dawn, the wife of Sarkum Ali returned back and told for taking the body of Sarkum Ali to the police station and also to the hospital. I know, the police got statement but I did not give any statement before the police. At this stage declared hostile by the prosecution. I know all the accused persons who of our village. It is not a fact that I stated before the I/O that on query about the injuries, Sarkum Ali slowly stated me that while he was returning from ‘Khasia Punji’ along with his daughter on the way Md. Abdul Kahlique alias Khalique Khasia, Amir Uddin and Md. Fakar Uddin restrained them and Fakar Uddin with a lathi inflicted injury on his head and body. It is also not a fact that stated before the I/O that seeing the seriousness of Sarkum Ali due to injury, I advised his wife to instantly shift Sarkum Ali to hospital and I returned back. Both my homestead and homestead of Sarkum Ali are in the tilla land intervening by a small piece of busy land. After my reaching, my son Alim Uddin and brother of Sarkum Ali namely Arkum Ali also went there in the homestead of Sarkum Ali. We stated there till dawn. It is not a fact that the accused persons being neighbour I wanted to save them and for that I adduced false evidence concealing the real fact.” 19. After my reaching, my son Alim Uddin and brother of Sarkum Ali namely Arkum Ali also went there in the homestead of Sarkum Ali. We stated there till dawn. It is not a fact that the accused persons being neighbour I wanted to save them and for that I adduced false evidence concealing the real fact.” 19. PW-4 Arkum Ali, the elder brother of the deceased in his examination-in-chief deposed that- “Deceased Sarkum Ali was my younger brother. His homestead situated at a distance of about 1½ k.m from my homestead. About 4/5 years back at one dawn the complainant Ayesha Begum, the wife of Sarkum Ali came to my house and awoke me and sweepingly reportedly me that her husband was assaulted by people and saying the same rushed towards the PS. At dawn, I came to her homestead and found children of Sarkum Ali were crying and also found Sarkum Ali was lying uncouscious. I saw injury mark on the head by the side of ear and many other parts of his body. On query, Aklima Begum, the daughter of Sarkum Ali told that on the way from ‘Khasia Punji’ at about 12-00 O’clock night accused persons namely Khalique, Amir and Fakar assaulted her father. No elderly persons were found there. I along with one Alim Uddin and others took the injured to the Cheragi Outpost. After that the complainant arrived there with a complain. Thereafter police sent the injured to the Dullavcherra PHC. Doctor of Dullavcherra PHC referred the injured to Karimganj Civil Hospital. On the way Sarkum Ali died, I was along with them. Dead –body was taken to Karimganj Civol Hospital and post mortem was done. During investigation police visited the PO. I gave statement to the police as I deposed today.” 20. PW-5 Alim Uddin, son-in-law of the deceased in his examination-in-chief deposed that- “About 4/5 years back Sarkum Ali was killed. The house of Sarkum Ali is situated at a distance of about 200 nals from my house. On the date of the alleged incident at about 10-30 pm hearing alarm of my mother-in-law, the wife of Sarkum Ali I went out and found all the 3(three) accused persns were coming from beneath the tilla land of Sarkum Ali. On my query to accused Fakar Uddin who is my cousin told that he assaulted Sarkum Ali. On the date of the alleged incident at about 10-30 pm hearing alarm of my mother-in-law, the wife of Sarkum Ali I went out and found all the 3(three) accused persns were coming from beneath the tilla land of Sarkum Ali. On my query to accused Fakar Uddin who is my cousin told that he assaulted Sarkum Ali. I then went to the house of Sarkum Ali and found Sarkum Ali was lying injured. Blood was coming out. My mother-in-law and sister-in-law namely Aklima Begum near to the injured. On query they told me that accused Fakar Uddin, Amir Uddin and Abdul Khalique inflicted injuries. The alleged incident took place below the tilla land of Sarkum Ali where my mother-in-law and sister-in-law were found. I managed to take Sarkum Ali to his house. My mother-in-law went out for reporting the matter to the brother of Sarkum Ali namely Akrum Ali. After reporting Arkum Ali, mother-in-law went to the PS. While I was with the injured in his house he told me the name of the accused persons who had inflicted injuries. He was unable to speak properly. In the dawn at about 5 am we managed to take the injured to Cheragi Police PP. As per suggestion we proceeded towards RK Nagar but on the way seeing the seriousness of the injured we proceeded to Karimganj Civil Hospital but on the way he succumbed to his injuries at around 8-30 am. However, we took the deceased Sarkum Ali to Karimganj Civil Hospital for post mortem. We are accompanied by police. On the following day my mother-in-law lodged ejahar. Out of the fear of the accused I had to leave my residence and compelled to reside in the State of Meghalaya. Accused Fakar Uddin threatened me stating that in case I did not drive out my wife he would kill me. Out of fear of accused, I could not return home for about 6(six) months and even today I have not seen face of my child. I have come from Meghalaya and stayed at Hailakandi and from Hailakandi today appeared before this Court. I reported about the date of this case over telephone from my house . Till now, I am scared of accused persons who may kill me in case I return to my home. “ 21. I have come from Meghalaya and stayed at Hailakandi and from Hailakandi today appeared before this Court. I reported about the date of this case over telephone from my house . Till now, I am scared of accused persons who may kill me in case I return to my home. “ 21. PW-6 Ala Uddin, neighbour of the deceased who was also declared hostile deposed that- “My house is situated at a distance of about 300 cubits from the house of Sarkum Ali. About 4/5 years back one day in the early morning I heard that Sarkum Ali was sick. Then I went there and saw that he was being carried out. 2/3 days after that I could learn from the family members of Sarkum Ali that accused persons causing injuries caused her death. I did not give any statement to the police as police did not get any scope to meet me during investigation as I was always busy with field work. It is not a fact that I did not state before the I/O that “It is not a fact that I did not state before the I/O that hearing the sound of weeping and that of a commotion raised by women around 12:00 o’clock on the night of 23.08.2008, I went to Sarkum Ali house to enquire about the incident. Finding Sarkum Ali inside his house in an injured state, I asked his wife who said that Sarkum Ali had been bringing home his daughter Aklima from Khasiapunjee when (1) Fakaruddin, (2) Amir Ali and (3) Khaleque MIan alias Abdul Khaleque had way laid him and his daughter on the road; that Fakaruddin had struck Sarkum Ali in his head and other parts of his person with a lathi that he had been carrying and had caused him injuires; that hearing the commotion raised by Sarkum Ali’s daughter, his wife had gone to the place of occurrence and that having seen her, the accused persons had run away. While narrating the incident before me, Sarkum Ali’s wife told me the names of these three accused persons.” At this stage declared hostile by the prosecution. My niece Afsara Begum got married with the younger brother of accused Fakar Uddin about 8 years back. It is not a fact that due to relation with the accused I concealing the real fact adduced false evidence.” 22. PW-7 Dr. My niece Afsara Begum got married with the younger brother of accused Fakar Uddin about 8 years back. It is not a fact that due to relation with the accused I concealing the real fact adduced false evidence.” 22. PW-7 Dr. Lipi Deb, the doctor who performed the post-mortem on the body of the deceased in her examination-in-chief reiterated her findings as was recorded in the post mortem report i.e., “In my opinion, death was due to intracranial injuries both hemorrhagic and neurogenic shock resulting from injuries sustained.” 23. PW- 8 who made an inquest over the dead body of the deceased and was entrusted to investigate the case deposed before the Court- “On 24.08.2008 I was posted at Cheragi PP as ASI of police. On that day at about 7.30 am one Sarkum Ali was brought to the Cheragi PP in injured condition by his wife Aina Bibi with information that he was allegedly assaulted by acused Fakar Uddin, Amir Uddin, Abdul Khalique and others. Accordingly, I made GD entry bearing No.322 dated 24.08.2008 of Cheragi PP and I sent the injured to Karimganj Civil Hospital with police escort. After sometimes police escort returned and informed that on the way to hospital Sarkum Ali died. I came to Karimganj Civil Hospital where inquest over the dead-body was done by me. Post mortem was also done there. At the time when Sarkum Ali was brought to our PP as injured condition, the wife of Sarkum Ali i.e. the complainant lodged written FIR which I forwarded to the Ratabri PS for registration and on the basis of that FIR I made the aforesaid GD Entry. On the same day the FIR was registered as Ratabari PS Case No.80 of 2008 u/s 147/341/325 IPC. I was entrusted with the investigation of this case. Ext.2 is that FIR lodged by the complainant on the basis of which, I made the GD entry, Ext. 2(1) is my endorsement with my signature. During investigation I visited the PO and drew a sketch map of the scene of occurrence vide Ext.3, 3(1) is my signature. I recorded statement of witnesses. Carbon copy of the inquest is available in my case diary. Original of which was handed over to the doctor who conducted the Post Mortem. Ext. 4 is the carbon copy of the inquest which is exhibited under objection. I recorded statement of witnesses. Carbon copy of the inquest is available in my case diary. Original of which was handed over to the doctor who conducted the Post Mortem. Ext. 4 is the carbon copy of the inquest which is exhibited under objection. Copy of which has already been furnished to the accused persons. Amongst the FIR named accused persons, I could arrest accused Amir Uddin and Fakar Uddin and sent them to judicial custody. Before completion of investigation I was transferred and handed over the case diary to the O/C Ratabari PS.” 24. PW-9 who took over as the case IO subsequently from PW-8 deposed- “ On 21.06.2009 I was at Cheragi PP as In-charge of Outpost. On that day O/C of Ratabari PS handed over the case diary of this case for completing the pending investigation. During tenure of my investigation I collected the Post Mortem report of Sarkum Ali and examined some other witnesses and after that on perusal of the case diary I submitted the charge sheet. Ext. 5 is the charge-sheet, 5(1) is my signature. I failed to arrest any of the accused persons. I submitted charge- sheet against these 3(three) accused persons showing Abdul Khalique as absconder. I made several attempts to apprehend them, but failed. PW-3 Abdul Mazid stated before me that on query about the injuries, Sarkum Ali slowly stated him that while Sarkum Ali was returning from Khasia Punji along with his daughter, on the way Md. Abdul Khalique alias Khalique Khasia, Amir Uddin and Md. Fakar Uddin restraed them and Fakar Uddin with a lathi inflicted injury on his (Sarkum Ali) head and body. PW-3 also stated before me that seeing the seriousness of Sarkum Ali due to injury he advised the wife of Sarkum Ali to shift Sarkum Ali to hospital instantly and he returned back. PW-6 Ala Uddin stated before me that “Hearing the wailing of women and a commotion around 12 o’clock on the night of 23.8.2008, I went to Sarkum Ali’s house to find out what had happened and found Sarkum Ali inside his house in an injured state. PW-6 Ala Uddin stated before me that “Hearing the wailing of women and a commotion around 12 o’clock on the night of 23.8.2008, I went to Sarkum Ali’s house to find out what had happened and found Sarkum Ali inside his house in an injured state. On enquiry, I came to know from his wife that Srkum Ali had been coming home with his Aklima from Khasiapunjee when (1) Fakaruddin (2) Amir Ali and (3) Khaleque Mian @ Abdul Khaleque ahd waylaid Sarkum Ali and his daughter on the road; that Fakaruddin had struck Sarkum Ali on the head and other parts of his person with the lathi he has been carrying and had caused him injuries; that hearing the sound of crying by Sarkum Ali’s daughter Aklima, Sarkum Ali’s wife had gone to the P.O. and that having seen her, the accd persons ran away. While speaking to me, Sarkum Ali’s wife told me the names of the aforesaid three accd persons.” 25. From the evidence led by the prosecution, it can be seen that PW-2 and her father were returning home on the night of the incident whereupon her father was attacked by the appellants. In her deposition she stated that it was the appellants who had inflicted injuries upon her father. She was an eye witness to the incident and her testimony is corroborated by the evidence of PWs-1, 4 and 5. PW-1 upon hearing the cry and alarm of her husband and her daughter rushed to the place of occurrence which was near their house. In her deposition before the Ld. Trial Court, she had clearly stated that it was the appellants who had inflicted injuries upon the deceased. As such, the statements of PW-2 are corroborated by the statements of the PW-1 and which also is further corroborated by the statements of Pw-4 and 5. PW-4 Akrum Ali who is the elder brother of the deceased deposed before the Court that Ayesha Begum, the wife of the deceased after the incident came to his house and woke him up weeping and reported that her husband was assaulted by some people and saying that she rushed towards the police station. PW-4 Akrum Ali who is the elder brother of the deceased deposed before the Court that Ayesha Begum, the wife of the deceased after the incident came to his house and woke him up weeping and reported that her husband was assaulted by some people and saying that she rushed towards the police station. In the morning, he went to the house of the deceased and found the deceased lying unconsciousness with the injury mark on his head by the side of his ear and many other parts of the body. On making enquiry, Aklima Begum, the daughter of the deceased told him that on the night before the accused persons, namely, Abdul Khaleque, Amir and Fakar assaulted her father. He along with one Alimuddin and others took the injured to Cheragi out-post whereafter, the police sent the deceased to Dulabcherra PHC. The doctor of Dulabcherra PHC referred the deceased to Karimganj Civil Hospital and it was on the way to the hospital the deceased succumbed to his injury. PW-5 Alim Uddin who is the cousin brother of Fakar Uuddin, one of the accused appellant in his deposition before the Court stated that on the date of the incident, he met the three accused persons coming from beneath the tilla land of the deceased Sarkum Ali. On making a query to the accused Fakar Uddin, he told him that he assaulted Sakrum Ali, the deceased. When he went to the house of the deceased, he found him lying injured with blood coming out. He saw the PW-1 and PW-2 near the Surkum Ali and on his query, the other told him that accused Fakar Uddin, Amir Uddin and Abdul Khaleque had inflicted the injuries. Furthermore, merely because the deceased was related to PW- 1 and PW-2, there are no reasons as to why their statements should be disbelieved. In such a situation, it is a settled law that it would not discredit the prosecution’s case but Court would only have to be more careful and cautious as held by the Apex Court in Gali Venkataiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2007)1 SCC 699 . In such a situation, it is a settled law that it would not discredit the prosecution’s case but Court would only have to be more careful and cautious as held by the Apex Court in Gali Venkataiah Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2007)1 SCC 699 . The post mortem report also indicates that 2” x 1” abrasion blackish in colour over the left side of forehead and 2 “ x 1 inch x ½ inch lacerated injury over left side of lower abdomen as well as depression fracture of frontal bone under the injury in the forehead was found. In the opinion of the report, it is indicated that death was due to intracranial injuries & both haemorrhagic and neurogenic shock resulting from injury sustained. The PW-2 in her examination-in-chief clearly stated that her father was assaulted by a sharp edged lathi by the accused appellant Fakkaruddin on the fateful night on his head while the other accused appellant Abdul Khaleque as well as Amir Uddin and Noor Ahmed also assaulted her father with a lathi. The injuries sustained by the deceased as can be seen from the post mortem report which became fatal were clearly inflicted by the appellants and therefore, in absence of the testimony of the PW-2 being shaken during her cross examination while the same is corroborated by the evidence of PW-1, 4 and 5, we do not find that the same can be discredited in order to come to a finding other than conviction of the appellants. 26. PW-3 and PW-6 during trial were declared hostile as they denied of having made any statements before the IO. PW-3 in his deposition admitted of having seen the deceased unconscious and in an injured condition. PW-6 deposed that he saw Sarkum Ali, the deceased being carried out from his house early morning, the night after the incident and that from the family members of the deceased he came to learn that the appellants had caused him injuries. Although they were declared hostile witnesses, their statements cannot be totally discarded and rejected but can be accounted for to the extent it supports the case of the prosecution as held by the Apex Court in the case of State of U.P. Vs. Ramesh Prasad Misra AIR 1996 SC 2766 and Bhajju Vs. State of M.P. (2012)4 SCC 327 . 27. Ramesh Prasad Misra AIR 1996 SC 2766 and Bhajju Vs. State of M.P. (2012)4 SCC 327 . 27. After the evidences were taken, the appellants were examined by the Ld. Trial Court under Section 313 of the Cr PC to enable them explain and clarify the evidence led against them. But however, besides a plain denial they all expressed that they have nothing to say. 28. Having opined that the version of PW-1 and 2 are corroborated by PW Nos.1, 4 and 5 besides the PW Nos.3 and 6, it cannot be a case of a single witness or a solitary witness based upon which the appellants were convicted. The decision relied upon by Mr. JC Barman i.e., Lalu Manjhi & Anr.(supra) and Anil Phukan (supra) will have no application to the instant case. It may also be noticed that none of the examination-in-chief of the prosecution witnesses has been shaken or diluted during their cross examination so as to create a doubt on the prosecution’s case. 29. The post mortem report also having clearly indicated injury sustained by the deceased also conform to the oral testimony of the PW-1 and 2 before the Court and therefore the decision rendered in the case Mahabir Singh (supra) also would not come to the aid of the appellants. Having held that there are not much inconsistencies in the evidence of the prosecution witness as well as the medical findings in the post-mortem report, the case of Sunil Kundu & Ors. cited by the counsel for the appellants would be not applicable to support their case. It has been held in the case of Sukhwinder Singh (supra) by the Apex Court that while it is true that the police should not involve innocent persons, fabricate evidence and obtain convictions, it is equally true that cases in which substratum of the prosecution case is strong and substantiated by reliable evidence lapses in the investigation should not persuade the Court to reject the prosecution case. The court with its vast experience should be quick to notice mischief even there is any. Incompetent prosecuting agencies or prosecuting agencies which are driven by extraneous consideration should not be allowed to take the Court for a ride. The court with its vast experience should be quick to notice mischief even there is any. Incompetent prosecuting agencies or prosecuting agencies which are driven by extraneous consideration should not be allowed to take the Court for a ride. In the case of Sheo Shankar Singh (supra), the Apex Court while affirming the conviction of the appellant therein had referred to another judgment of the Apex Court i.e., Malkhan Singh Vs. State of M.P. (2003)5 SCC 746 . Relevant portion of the judgment may be quoted as under- “It is accordingly considered a safe rule of prudence to generally look for corroboration of the sworn testimony of witnesses in court as to the identity of the accused who are strangers to them, in the form of earlier identification proceedings. This rule of prudence, however, is subject to exceptions; when, for example, the court is impressed by a particular witness on whose testimony it can safely rely, without such or other corroboration. The identification parades belong to the stage of investigation, and there is no provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure which obliges the investigating agency to hold, or confers a right upon the accused to claim a test identification parade. They do not constitute substantive evidence and these parades are essentially governed by Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Failure to hold a test identification parade would not make inadmissible the evidence of identification in court. The weight to be attached to such identification should be a matter for the courts of fact. In appropriate cases it may accept the evidence of identification even without insisting on corroboration.” Considering the decision of the Apex Court as referred to above, the case of Suresh Chandra Jana & Ors. (supra) relied upon by the appellants would also be of no assistance. 30. With regard to the enmity between the family of the deceased and that of the accused appellants as projected by the learned counsels for the appellants, the PW-1 in her examination-in-chief stated that there was a land dispute between her husband and the appellants. Her husband had purchased 5 kattas of land from one Afaz Ali, but the same remained in the possession of the appellants and for that reason, dispute and enmity prevailed. Her husband had purchased 5 kattas of land from one Afaz Ali, but the same remained in the possession of the appellants and for that reason, dispute and enmity prevailed. She also stated that although attempt was made to resolve the issue by holding meetings in the village, but of no result could be achieved. However, it may be noticed that nowhere in the cross examination of the PW-1 is there a mention about the enmity. According to PW-1, her husband after the assault told her that the appellants for no reason assaulted him. Therefore, apparently in order to explain the assault, a mention about the enmity has been made. This by itself cannot discredit the statement of PW-1 or rather the case of the prosecution when it is in evidence through corroborated statements of the prosecution witnesses that the deceased was attacked by the appellants. 31. Upon carefully considering the case in its entirety, we find no grounds to interfere on the decision rendered by the learned Trial Court. As a result, the judgment impugned is affirmed and both the appeals are dismissed. Registry to send back the records mmediately. 32. Before parting with the case, as a token of our appreciation on the valuable assistance rendered by Mr. S Chamaria the learned Amicus Curiae, we direct the State Legal Services Authority, Assam to pay the learned counsel a sum of Rs. 7,500.00 as his fees.