JUDGMENT : Indira Jain, J. The appellants/original accused nos.1 and 2 have preferred these appeals against the judgment and order dated 09/09/2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur in Sessions Trial No.53/2014. By the said judgment and order, the learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted appellants of the offences punishable under Sections 302 read with 34 and 324 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC for short) and sentenced each of them as under : Sections Sentence Imprisonment for life + Fine of Rs. 3,000/-, in default R.I. for four months each. 324 r/w 34 R.I. for one year + Fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default R.I. for two months each. 2. Accused were also prosecuted for the offences punishable under Section 4 read with Section 25 of the Arms Act and 37(1) and (3) read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. For want of sufficient evidence, accused were acquitted of the charge under the Arms Act and the Bombay Police Act. 3. For the sake of convenience, we shall refer the appellants in their original status as accused nos.1 and 2, as they were referred before the trial Court. 4. Prosecution case briefly stated is as under : (I) Deceased Shubham and accused no.1-Sagar were cousins. Complainant Akash Lalji Bhude, Sumit Mohanji Dere and Shubham were the friends. On 16/10/2013, at around 02:15 p.m., Shubham, Sumit and Akash Bhude were returning home on foot. Near N.I.T. Garden, accused Sagar with one boy came on motorcycle. Duo alighted from motorcycle and started assaulting Shubham by means of knives. Sumit and Akash Bhude tried to intervene. The unknown boy, who accompanied Sagar, attacked Akash Bhude. Akash Bhude tried to save himself and in that attempt received injury below his little finger of left hand. Shubham collapsed on the ground due to multiple injuries. Assailants fled away on motorcycle. Then Sumit rushed to the house of Shubham and informed about the incident to his family members. Informant Akash followed him. Rajesh Harode uncle and Poonam sister of Shubham rushed to the spot. They shifted him to Radhakrishna Hospital. Shubham succumbed to injuries on the same day. (II) Rajesh Harode, uncle of Shubham then went to Police Station Lakadganj along with 2-3 persons and informed about the incident. Informant Akash also reached there. Akash Bhude lodged report. Informant Akash followed him. Rajesh Harode uncle and Poonam sister of Shubham rushed to the spot. They shifted him to Radhakrishna Hospital. Shubham succumbed to injuries on the same day. (II) Rajesh Harode, uncle of Shubham then went to Police Station Lakadganj along with 2-3 persons and informed about the incident. Informant Akash also reached there. Akash Bhude lodged report. Information given by Rajesh Harode about the assault was entered in station diary. Police Inspector Vijay Akot took over investigation. He visited the spot and drew spot-panchnama in the presence of panch witnesses. From the spot, simple earth, earth mixed with soil and footwear came to be seized. Inquestpanchnama was recorded. Dead body was sent for postmortem. PW-9 Dr. Chaitanya Tingane was Medical Officer at Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur. He performed postmortem and opined cause of death due to injuries to vital organs. The clothes of deceased came to be seized. Accused were arrested. Their blood samples and nail-clippings were collected. (III) Accused made disclosure statements and in pursuance to the information given by accused no.1, plastic bag containing a knife and his clothes were recovered. Recovery-panchnama was accordingly drawn. Memorandum of accused no.2 was also recorded. As per memorandum, he discovered his clothes and the same were seized. Motorcycle, on which assailants came, was recovered and its seizure-panchnama was drawn. It was revealed during investigation that along with accused Sagar and Akash, a juvenile in conflict with law, was also an assailant. Statements of eye-witnesses were recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Seized muddemal was sent to forensic laboratory. Test identification parade was conducted. After completing investigation, charge-sheet was submitted to the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nagpur, who in turn committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. 5. Charge of the alleged offences came to be explained to the accused vide Exh.15. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Their defence was of total denial and false implication. 6. In support of its case, prosecution examined in all 11 witnesses. On going through the evidence adduced in the case, learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused as stated in paragraph 1 above. Being aggrieved thereof, accused have assailed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence in these appeals. 6. In support of its case, prosecution examined in all 11 witnesses. On going through the evidence adduced in the case, learned Additional Sessions Judge convicted and sentenced the accused as stated in paragraph 1 above. Being aggrieved thereof, accused have assailed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence in these appeals. Criminal Appeal No.336/2015 is by accused no.2 Akash and Criminal Appeal No.371/2015 is by accused no.1 Sagar. 7. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties. On careful consideration of the evidence and material on record, for the reasons mentioned below, we are of the opinion that prosecution has established the guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt and there is no merit in the appeals. 8. Needless to state that in a case of murder, factum of homicidal death is to be established beyond all reasonable doubts by the prosecution. PW-9 Dr. Chaitanya Tingane, Medical Officer at Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur (IGMC) performed postmortem and noticed the following external injuries on the dead body. (1) Contused abrasion over right parasternal region of chest situated 0.5 cm below supra sternal notch of size 1.5 cm x 0.5 cm, dark red. (2) Stab wound over left side of chest in upper 1/3rd region situated 4 cms below medial end of clavicle with medial end of wound situated in midline of size 3 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep with tailing of 4 cms along lateral end, both margins and angles sharp. (3) Stab wound over right hypochondriac region of abdomen situated 0.5 cm below coastal margin and 7 cms from midline of size 4 cm x 1.5 cm cavity deep, directing backwards and medially, both margins and angles sharp. (4) Through and through stab wound over upper 1/3rd region of left arm with entry wound situated over anterior aspect and 3 cms below tip of acromian of size 2.8 cm x 1 cm and exit wound situated over lateral aspect and 2 cms lateral to entry wound of size 0.5cm x 0.5 cm, underlying muscles cut. Both margins and angles sharp. (5) Through and through stab wound over upper 1/3rd region of left forearm with entry wound situated over posterior aspect and 8 cms below tip of olecranon process of size 3 cm x 1 cm and exit wound situated over anterial aspect of size 2 cm x 1 cm, underlying muscles cut. Both margins and angles sharp. (5) Through and through stab wound over upper 1/3rd region of left forearm with entry wound situated over posterior aspect and 8 cms below tip of olecranon process of size 3 cm x 1 cm and exit wound situated over anterial aspect of size 2 cm x 1 cm, underlying muscles cut. Subcutaneous fat protruding out both margins and angles sharp. (6) Abrasion over lower aspect of front of left knee of size 2 cm x 1 cm, red. (7) Linear abrasion over area overlying supratstrend notch of size 0.8 cm x 0.1 cm, red. (8) Chop wound over right occipital region of head situated 2 cms above occipital protruberance with medial end in midline of size 7 cm x 1 cm x bone deep underlying bone cut fractured. (9) Chop wound over nape of neck extending on both sides of midline with right end situated 0.2 cm below injury (8) of size 7 cm x 2 cm x bone deep. Underlying bone cut. (10) Chop wound over right parietal region of head situated 7 cms from midline and 7 cm from right mastroid of size 3 cm x 0.5 cm x cronial cavity deep, underlying bone cut fractured. Meanings and brain cut. (11) Stab wound over right nape of neck situated 2 cm lateral to injury no. (9) and 2 cms below right mastoid process of size 3 cms x 1.5 cms x muscle deep. Both margins and angels sharp. (12) Stab wound over right nape of neck situated 1 cm below injury (11) and 5 cms from midline of size 3 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep, both margines and angles sharp. (13) Stab wound over left nape of neck situated 2.5 cms below tip of left mastroid process and 2 cms lateral to left end of injury no. (9) of size 2.5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep, both margins and angles sharp. (14) Contused abrasion over posterior aspect of left shoulder of size 2.5 cm x 1.5 cm, dark red. (15) Stab wound over left scapular region of back situated 3 cms medial to spine of left scapula and 4 cms from midline of size 4 cm x 1.5 cm x cavity deep, directing forwards, both margins and angles sharp. (14) Contused abrasion over posterior aspect of left shoulder of size 2.5 cm x 1.5 cm, dark red. (15) Stab wound over left scapular region of back situated 3 cms medial to spine of left scapula and 4 cms from midline of size 4 cm x 1.5 cm x cavity deep, directing forwards, both margins and angles sharp. (16) Stab wound over left scapular region of back situated 5 cms below injury (15) and 5 cms from midline of size 4 cm x 1.5 cm x cavity deep, directing forwards, both margins and angles sharp, Hilt impression present along medial end of injury circular in shape of size 1 cm x 1 cm. (17) Stab wound over left inter scapular region situated 4 cms from midline and 2 cms below injury no.(16) of size 3.5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep, both margins and angles sharp. (18) Stab wound over left lateral aspect of back in middle 1/3rd region situated 14 cms from midline and 6 cms below inferior angle of scapula of size 3 cms x 1.5 cm x muscle deep, both margins and angles sharp, tailing of 1 cm present over upper end. 9. Medical Officer also found the following internal injuries while performing postmortem. Head: (i) Injuries under the scalp, their nature : Under-scalp haematoma over. (i) Right parietal region of size 6 cm x 4 cm, dark red. (ii) Right occupital region of size 7 cm x 5 cm, dark red. Skull : Vault : (1) Cut fracture of size 5 cm over right occipital region corresponding to injury no.(8) in column no.17. (2) Cut fracture of size 3 cm over right occipital region corresponding to injury no.(9) in column no.17. (3) Linear displaced cut fracture over right parietal region of size 3 cm x 0.5 cm, corresponding to injury no.(10) in column no.17. Meanings : Cut over right parietal region corresponding to injury no.(10) in column no.17. Brain : Cut over right parietal region of size 1.5 cm x 0.5 cm corresponding to injury no.(10) in column no.17. Thorax : (a) walls, ribs, cartilages - Refer to injury nos.15 to 18 mentioned in column no.17. (b) Pleura - Cut corresponding to injury nos.15 and 16 mentioned in column no.17 present, left pleaural cavity contains about 200 ml blood. Thorax : (a) walls, ribs, cartilages - Refer to injury nos.15 to 18 mentioned in column no.17. (b) Pleura - Cut corresponding to injury nos.15 and 16 mentioned in column no.17 present, left pleaural cavity contains about 200 ml blood. (e) Left Lung - Pastially collapsed, through and through stab wound present over posterior aspect of lower lobe with entry wound 0 size 3 cm x 0.5 cm x exit wound over anterior aspect of lower lobe of size 0.5 cm x 0.5 cm, pale corresponding to injury no.16 mentioned in column no.17. Abdomen - Walls and Peritoneum : Cut corresponding to injury no.3 mentioned in column no.17 present. 10. According to the Doctor, all above injuries were antemortem. The cause of death was due to injuries to vital organs. Viscera was preserved and the same was sent to Forensic Laboratory later on. Nothing substantial could be elicited in cross-examination of Medical Officer to disbelieve his testimony. He is an independent witness and had no reason to depose a lie. 11. In addition to postmortem report (Exh.75), prosecution has also relied upon spot-panchnama (Exh.45) and un-controverted inquest-panchnama (Exh.72) to establish the factum of death as homicidal. The factual position narrated in spot-panchnama and inquest-panchnama completely over rule the possibility of natural, accidental or suicidal death and unerringly points out that Shubham died of homicidal death. We find that through the evidence of Medical Officer, panch-witnesses, postmortem report, inquest-panchnama and spot-panchnama, prosecution has succeeded in proving the factum of death as homicidal death. 12. So far as authorship of accused nos.1 and 2 in causing the death is concerned, prosecution case mainly revolves around the evidence of two eye-witnesses viz. PW-1 informant Akash Lalji Bhude and PW-2 Sumit Dere. It is not in serious dispute that informant Akash, deceased Shubham and eye-witness Sumit were the friends. It is also an admitted fact that accused no.1 Sagar and deceased Shubham were closely related. According to informant Akash, on 16/10/2013 at around 02:00 p.m., he along with Sumit and Shubham was sitting near the house of Shubham at Kumbharpura. That time, Shubham asked them to accompany him for having 'Kharra'. Then trio went to pan-stall of Nilesh. Shubham purchased 'Kharra'. Thereafter, they proceeded towards their house. The evidence of PW-1 Akash shows that when they reached Chitra Shala Mandir, Nayapura, near N.I.T. Garden, at around 02:15 p.m., three persons came on motorcycle. That time, Shubham asked them to accompany him for having 'Kharra'. Then trio went to pan-stall of Nilesh. Shubham purchased 'Kharra'. Thereafter, they proceeded towards their house. The evidence of PW-1 Akash shows that when they reached Chitra Shala Mandir, Nayapura, near N.I.T. Garden, at around 02:15 p.m., three persons came on motorcycle. He could identify accused Sagar and accused Akash. Third person was of dark complexion. He stated that those persons got down from the vehicle and came to Shubham. They had knives with them and all the three started stabbing repeatedly to Shubham on his throat, head, chest and abdomen. When he intervened to save Shubham, accused with the third person delivered blow of knife on his chest, but he resisted and sustained injury to his little finger of left hand. Shubham collapsed on the ground. Accused fled away from the spot. Then Sumit rushed to the house of Shubham, which was at some distance and informant Akash followed him. They informed about the incident to mother, sister and uncle of Shubham. They rushed to the spot and Shubham was shifted to Radhakrishna Hospital. Informant Akash and Rajesh, uncle of Shubham went to Lakadganj Police Station. Akash lodged report (Exh.39). 13. PW-2 Sumit Dere fully supports the evidence of informant Akash particularly regarding the manner of incident. It is stated by Sumit that both the accused and one Usman Ali (juvenile in conflict with law) came to the spot on a motorcycle, one Nitesh (another juvenile in conflict with law) also came there on foot. He states that both the accused and Usman Ali started assaulting Shubham by means of knives and Nitesh caught hold Shubham that time. He then says that accused Akash assaulted Shubham with knife as well as with kicks and fists blows. He and PW-1 Akash tried to save Shubham. That time, Usman Ali gave a blow of knife on PW-1 Akash, who resisted the blow by his left hand and received injury on little finger of his left hand. Sumit also states that Shubham received bleeding injuries and collapsed on the spot. Assailants then ran away. He and Akash (PW-1) informed about the incident to the family members of Shubham and thereafter Shubham was shifted to the hospital, where he succumbed to injuries. 14. Sumit also states that Shubham received bleeding injuries and collapsed on the spot. Assailants then ran away. He and Akash (PW-1) informed about the incident to the family members of Shubham and thereafter Shubham was shifted to the hospital, where he succumbed to injuries. 14. On the law relating to appreciation of evidence of eye-witness, learned Counsel for appellant/accused no.1 submitted that evidence of eye-witness cannot be mechanically accepted and it is required to test the evidence on the anvil of objective circumstances brought on record. In support of his submission, learned Counsel relies upon (i) Hallu and others v. State of Madhya Pradesh - [ (1974) 4 SCC 300 ], (ii) Suresh Purushottam Ashtankar v. State of Maharashtra and another, judgment of this Court dated 31/10/2014 in Criminal Appeal No.408 of 2012 and (iii) Narayan Kanu Datavale and others v. State of Maharashtra - [1997 CRI.L.J. 1788 (Bom)]. 15. It is vehemently contended on behalf of accused no.1 that suspicion is not the substitute for proof and unless the prosecution proves the case beyond all reasonable doubt, conviction would not sustain. The learned Counsel fortifies his submission relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Varkey Joseph v. State of Kerala - [1993 CRI.L.J. 2010 (SC)]. 16. Assailing the evidence of PW-1 Akash, it is submitted on behalf of the accused that incident occurred at 14:15 hours and report was lodged at 16:25 hours. Submission is that, delay is not explained. On effect of delay in lodging F.I.R., reliance is placed on the decisions of this Court in Ashraf Hussain Shah v. State of Maharashtra - [1996 CRI.L.J. 3147] and Mr. Remy Vaz v. State of Goa - [2014 ALL MR (Cri) 4703]. It is submitted that information given by uncle Rajesh Harode, examined as court witness, was entered in station diary as Entry No. 36. Prosecution deliberately suppressed this entry and in these circumstances delay in registering F.I.R. creates doubt on the real genesis of the prosecution case. In this connection, learned Counsel refers to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Jamuna Chaudhary and others v. State of Bihar - [1974 CRI.L.J. 890 (SC)] and submits that it was the duty of Investigating Officer to bring the real unvarnished truth before the Court, but suppression of station diary entry is self-explanatory to indicate that investigating agency failed in its duty. 17. 17. So far as non-production of entry no.36 of station diary is concerned, we do find that Investigating Officer ought to have submitted an extract of such entry along with the charge sheet. Still the crucial question is whether its non-production vitiates the prosecution as a whole. Admittedly, entry was taken on the basis of information given by Rajesh Harode, uncle of the deceased. He was not an eye-witness to the incident. PW-1 Akash was an eye-witness and on the basis of the information given by Akash, who also had been to Police Station at the same time, F.I.R. was registered. Investigating Officer (PW-11) Police Inspector Vijay Akot was cross-examined at length. Nothing is brought in his piercing cross-examination to indicate that entry no.36 was deliberately suppressed and it has bearing on the genesis of the prosecution case. In this background, we do not find substance in the submission of the learned Counsel for accused no.1 that the truth has been suppressed as station diary entry was withheld. 18. Regarding delay in F.I.R., needless to state that it would depend upon the facts of each case. Learned Counsel for accused no.1 commenting upon the evidence of PW-1 Akash and PW-2 Sumit then stated that both claimed themselves as friends of Shubham and instead of taking Shubham to hospital, they rushed to the house of Shubham, which according to the learned Counsel depicts their unnatural conduct. It has come in the cross-examination of PW-1 Akash that Police Station Lakadganj was situated around 11/2 km from the spot of incident. Informant Akash also received injury in an attempt to save himself from the blow delivered with a knife on him. The house of Shubham was not far away from the place of occurrence. Initially, Sumit rushed to the house of Shubham and then PW-1 Akash followed him. We do not find anything unnatural in the conduct of PW-1 Akash and PW-2 Sumit, when they say, immediately they rushed to the house of Shubham and informed about the incident to their family members. It is pertinent to note that incident occurred in the broad day light. The manner in which Shubham was assaulted and assailants did not even spare informant Akash, who intervened, delay of around two hours keeping in view the distance between place of occurrence and police station cannot be said to be fatal to the prosecution case. 19. It is pertinent to note that incident occurred in the broad day light. The manner in which Shubham was assaulted and assailants did not even spare informant Akash, who intervened, delay of around two hours keeping in view the distance between place of occurrence and police station cannot be said to be fatal to the prosecution case. 19. From the cross-examination of PW-1 Akash and PW-2 Sumit, it can be seen that they have no reason to grind an axe against the accused. Their evidence is throughout consistent and they corroborate each other. We find no reason to disbelieve the evidence of PW-1 Akash and PW-2 Sumit. 20. In addition to evidence of eye-witnesses, prosecution has brought on record certain incriminating circumstances against the accused. PW-5 Dhiraj Gajbhiye is a witness on recovery of knife under Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act from accused no.1 Sagar. He proves memorandum (Exh.58) and discovery-panchnama (Exh.59) and also identifies knife (Article-5). The evidence of this witness is not shattered in the cross-examination. 21. So far as other witnesses are concerned, they are on seizure of clothes of deceased and accused persons. Since, C.A. Reports do not link the accused, we find that evidence on seizure of clothes of accused and deceased is not of much assistance to the prosecution. However, in our view, the same would not come in the way of prosecution, as evidence of the eyewitnesses being consistent, trustworthy and believable is sufficient to base a conviction. 22. In the above premise, we find that appeals are devoid of merits and substance. Hence, both the appeals are dismissed. No costs. Appeals dismissed.