JUDGMENT : H.C. Mishra, J. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the State. 2. The sole appellant is aggrieved by the impugned Judgment of conviction dated 14.03.2007 and Order of sentence dated 16.03.2007, passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur, in Sessions Trial No.481 of 2005, whereby, the sole appellant has been found guilty and convicted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Upon hearing on the point of sentence, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the said offence. 3. The case relates to double murder, in which, the old aged couple were brutally murdered in their own house. The police case was instituted on the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant Bijay Kumar, who is the son-in-law of both the deceased, recorded on 02.09.2005, at about 5:45 A.M., at the house of the deceased Balbir Singh and his wife Darshan Kaur, situated at Gurudwara Basti, B-Zone, P.S Sakchi, District East Singhbhum, stating therein that in the early morning, the informant was informed telephonically by Romi and Babu, his cousins-in-law, that his father-in-law was murdered in the house. Upon getting this information, he came to his in-laws’ house and found the eastern room locked. He peeped into the room through the window, from where only the leg of his father-in-law could be seen, which was smeared with blood. In the meantime, the police party also reached there. He tried to gather the information about the occurrence, whereupon, two children, namely Surabhi, aged about 13 years, who was working as maid in the their house and Radha, aged about 10 years, the daughter of Gopal Krishna Bhatia, the tenant in the said house, informed him that both of them were sleeping with Dadi, i.e., the deceased, Darshan Kaur, in the house. In the night, someone knocked the grill, whereupon, Dadi asked as to who was there, whereupon, the person knocking the grill, said that he was ‘Sonu’. Dadi again asked, which Sonu, whereupon, he said that he had come from Ranchi from the Mousi’s place. Dadi opened the grill and the person entered into the house. Dadi asked him as to why he had got his hair cut, whereupon, he replied that he had got his hair cut on his own will. Dadi again asked, which Sonu, whereupon, he said that he had come from Ranchi from the Mousi’s place. Dadi opened the grill and the person entered into the house. Dadi asked him as to why he had got his hair cut, whereupon, he replied that he had got his hair cut on his own will. Dadi again asked about his father, whereupon he said that his father had gone to Punjab for constructing the house. Dadi offered him a glass of water, upon which, Surabhi gave him a glass of water. Upon being asked by Dadi, he said that he had come to Jamshedpur with some work, but he got late. Thereafter, they talked for some time and Dadi told him to sleep in the western room. Both the girls, thereafter, slept with the Dadi. After some time, they woke up upon the alarm raised by Dadi, whereupon they rushed towards the room of Dadaji and saw that the person, who had introduced him as ‘Sonu’, was assaulting Dadaji and upon seeing the children, accused came out and said that Dadi had got some fits, due to which, she was shouting and asked them to go and sleep. Thereupon, both the children went upstairs and informed the father of Radha about the occurrence, whereupon, he also came down and said 'Sonu' informed him that the lady had got some fits and there was nothing to worry about, and asked him to go and sleep. Thereafter, both the children went with the father of Radha and slept there. In the morning, when they came down at about 5:00 A.M, they saw the room of Dadaji locked and there were some bloodstains there and the said 'Sonu' had fled away. The father of Radha peeped into the room through the window and saw the leg of Dadaji, but Dadaji was not visible from there and the blood was scattered here and there in the room. Thereafter, the persons nearby were informed. In the meantime, the police arrived and the lock of the room was broken. The dead bodies of Balbir Singh and Darshan Kaur were found there on the floor in the pool of blood. The necks of both of them were slit and there were injuries on the other parts of the body also. Thereafter, the persons nearby were informed. In the meantime, the police arrived and the lock of the room was broken. The dead bodies of Balbir Singh and Darshan Kaur were found there on the floor in the pool of blood. The necks of both of them were slit and there were injuries on the other parts of the body also. The physique of the accused, as disclosed by the tenant and the two children, was also mentioned in the fardbeyan and it was stated that both the deceased had been murdered by some known relative of Darshan Kaur, who had introduced himself as ‘Sonu’. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, Sakchi P.S Case No.201 of 2005, corresponding to G.R No.1854 of 2005, was instituted for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, against the person named as 'Sonu' and investigation was taken up. After investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet against the present accused. 4. Upon commitment of the case to the Court of Session, charge was framed against the present accused for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, and upon the accused’s pleading not guilty and claiming to be tried, he was put to trial. In course of trial, nine witnesses were examined by the prosecution, including the I.O. and the Doctor, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead bodies of both the deceased. Out of the material witnesses examined, P.W.-7 Seema, who is the daughter of the deceased and the wife of the informant, has stated that she has nothing to say about the case. 5. P.W.-6 Bijay Kumar is the informant of the case and the son-in-law of both the deceased. He has stated that Balbir Singh and Darshan Kaur were his parents-in-law. The occurrence had taken place in the night between 1st and 2nd September, 2005, and he was informed about the occurrence at about 5:00 A.M. in the morning by his cousin-in-law Romi, that his father-in-law had been murdered. Upon getting the information, he came to Sakchi at his father-in-law’s place and found the room locked. There were bloodstains on the door. He peeped through the window and saw the leg of his father-in-law smeared with the blood. Upon getting the information, he came to Sakchi at his father-in-law’s place and found the room locked. There were bloodstains on the door. He peeped through the window and saw the leg of his father-in-law smeared with the blood. The maid Surabhi, the tenant Gopal Krishna Bhatia and his daughter Radha, informed him that at about 12:00 A.M, one person named as 'Sonu' had come and knocked the grill, whereupon, his mother-in-law opened the grill and allowed him to come inside. They talked for some time and thereafter, he was asked to go and sleep. After some time, Surabhi and Radha woke up upon the alarm raised by his mother-in-law and when they went towards the room of Dadaji, they saw Sonu assaulting Dadaji, and he came out and told them that Dadi had got some fits, asking them to go and sleep. Both the children thereafter went upstairs and informed Gopal Krishna Bhatia and when he came down, he was also told by the accused that Dadiji had got some fits and he was asked to go and sleep. When all of them came down in the morning, they saw the room locked from outside and there were bloodstains also, and when they peeped through the window, they saw the leg of the deceased Balbir Singh and they informed the brother of the deceased. This witness has stated that when he reached there, the police also arrived and the lock was broken and they entered into the room and saw the dead bodies of his parents-in-law. He has stated that the police had recorded his fardbeyan, on which, he had put his signature, which was marked as Exhibit-2/1 on his identification. He has identified the accused in the Court. In his cross-examination, he has stated that Romy and Babu are his cousins-in-law and they lived in the neighborhood. He was informed about the occurrence at about 5:00 A.M. in the morning. He has stated that the lock was broken by the police in his presence. He got mentally upset for about 15 minutes, upon seeing the dead bodies. This witness has also stated that Balbinder Kaur, the own sister of his mother-in-law Darshan Kaur, lives in Ranchi. She has three sons, but the accused is not the son of Balbinder Kaur. He has stated that he had identified the accused, when he was apprehended by the police. This witness has also stated that Balbinder Kaur, the own sister of his mother-in-law Darshan Kaur, lives in Ranchi. She has three sons, but the accused is not the son of Balbinder Kaur. He has stated that he had identified the accused, when he was apprehended by the police. He has denied the suggestion of giving false evidence. 6. P.W.-3 is Surabhi Munda, aged about 11 years, and P.W.-5 is Radha Bhati, aged about 12 years. Both these child witnesses were sleeping with the deceased Darshan Kaur in the night of occurrence. Both of them have stated that they were sleeping with Dadi, and at about 12:00 A.M in the night, someone knocked the door, whereupon, Dadi asked that who was there. The person replied that he was 'Sonu' and upon further enquiry by Dadi, he said that he had come from Ranchi from the Mousi’s place. Thereafter, Dadi opened the lock of the grill and allowed the person to come inside. Dadi also asked as to why he had got his hair cut, whereupon he said that he got the hair cut on his own will, and upon enquiry from Dadi about his father, he said that the father had gone to Punjab for constructing the house. She also offered a glass of water to him, which was given to him by Surabhi, and thereafter, Dadi and that person talked for some time. Later, Dadi asked him to go and sleep in another room and both the children also slept with the Dadi. After some time, both of them woke up on the alarm raised by Dadi and when they went there, they saw that Sonu was assaulting Dadaji and upon seeing them, he came out and told them that Dadiji had got some fits and asked them to go and sleep, whereupon, they went upstairs and informed the father of P.W.-5 Radha Bhatia, who also came down and he was also told by the accused that Dadiji had got some fits and the accused also asked him also to go and sleep, whereupon, all of them went upstairs and they slept. In the morning, at about 5:00 A.M., when they came down, they saw the room locked and Sonu was not there. There were bloodstains also. The leg of dadaji were visible from the window but Dadiji was not visible. In the morning, at about 5:00 A.M., when they came down, they saw the room locked and Sonu was not there. There were bloodstains also. The leg of dadaji were visible from the window but Dadiji was not visible. Thereafter, the persons nearby were informed and the police also came there. P.W.-3 Surabhi Munda has stated that the lock of the room was broken by the police and they saw the dead bodies of Dadaji and Dadiji in the pool of blood. Both these witnesses have identified the accused, stating that he was the person who had introduced himself as 'Sonu'. They have also stated that they had identified the accused in the jail / P.S. (in T.I.P.). Both these witnesses have stated in their cross-examination that after three days, the police had brought Sonu at the place of occurrence. 7. P.W.-4 Gopal Krishna Bhatia is the tenant of the deceased. He has stated that he was living in the house of the deceased as tenant on the upper floor along-with his family. The occurrence took place in the night between 1st and 2nd September, 2005, and his daughter Radha was also sleeping with Dadiji in the ground floor. He has stated that she used to address Darshan Kaur as Dadi. At about 1.00 to 1.30 A.M in the night, his daughter and Surabhi both came running to the upper floor and informed him that one person named as 'Sonu' was assaulting Dada and Dadi, whereupon, he came down along with both the children. Sonu came out of the room of Balbir Singh and he told that Mousiji had got the heart attack and he asked them to go upstairs and sleep. Thereafter, they went upstairs. In the morning, when they came down, they saw the room locked from outside and there were bloodstains also. He peeped into the room through the window and saw only one leg smeared with blood. Thereafter, he informed the persons nearby. He also informed the brother of Balbir Singh, living in the neighborhood, and in the meantime the police also came there. The police broke the lock and found the dead bodies of Balbir Singh and Darshan Kaur, lying on the floor in the pool of blood. He had identified the accused in the Court, stating that he is the same 'Sonu', whom he had seen in the night of occurrence. The police broke the lock and found the dead bodies of Balbir Singh and Darshan Kaur, lying on the floor in the pool of blood. He had identified the accused in the Court, stating that he is the same 'Sonu', whom he had seen in the night of occurrence. This witness was cross-examined by the defence, in which, he has stated that he was tenant in the house from two months prior to the occurrence. He has also stated that the Balraj Singh, the brother of Balbir Singh was living nearby and Romy, Babu and Banti are his sons. There was good relationship between the brothers. He has stated that he had no knowledge where Balbir Singh was working, rather he was retired. He was put to a lengthy cross-examination regarding the topography of the house, but there is nothing of much importance therein. He has stated that T.I.P was held in the jail, but he could not identify the accused in the said T.I.P. He has denied the suggestion of giving the false evidence. 8. P.W.-1 Arindrajeet Singh is also the brother of the deceased Balbir Singh. He is only a witness to the inquest reports of both the dead bodies and he has identified his signatures on the inquest reports, which were marked as Exhibits-1 & 2. In his cross-examination, he has stated that both the dead bodies were in the same room. He has also stated that the lock was broken in his presence but he has no knowledge whether the lock was seized or not. 9. P.W.-2 Dr. Jakka Sriniwas Rao had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead bodies of both the deceased on 02.09.2005. He had found the following injuries on the dead body of Balbir Singh:- External 1. Incised wound measuring 1 ½ cm. x ½ cm x skin deep over left side of the face near left ear 2 cm away left tragus. 2. Incised wound 2 ½ cm x ½ cm x muscle deep over left side of the face 2 cm. away from left ear. 3. Incised wound 1 ½ cm x ½ cm x muscle deep over left side of the face 4 cm. away left ear. 4. Incised cut throat wound 8 cm x 1 ½ cm x soft tissue deep. Trachea cut present transversely over front of neck 8 cm. below chin and 6 cm. away from left ear. 3. Incised wound 1 ½ cm x ½ cm x muscle deep over left side of the face 4 cm. away left ear. 4. Incised cut throat wound 8 cm x 1 ½ cm x soft tissue deep. Trachea cut present transversely over front of neck 8 cm. below chin and 6 cm. above clavicular notch cutting the soft tissue, trachea, blood vessels and oesophagus. 5. Incised wound 2 ½ cm x 1 cm x muscle deep, just 1 cm. above injury No.2. 6. Incised wound 3 cm. x 1 ½ cm. x muscle deep, 5 cm. above right clavicle and right side of the neck. 7. Incised wound 3 cm. x 1 cm. x muscle deep, 3 cm. above right clavicle, right side of the neck. 8. Incised wound size 3 cm. x 1 cm. x muscle deep, 1 cm. above right clavicle and right side of the neck. 9. Incised wound ½ cm. x ½ cm. x skin deep front of the right side of the chest 9 cm. above right nipple. 10. Incised wound 2 ½ x 1 cm. x muscle deep front of upper part of abdomen 11 cm. above umbilicus and 7 cm. below xiphi sternum. 11. Incised wound 2 x 1 cm. x muscle deep, 2 cm. left to umbilicus. 12. Incised wound 2½ cm. x 1 cm. x muscle deep back of abdomen at lumber region 7 cm. right to vertebral column and 6 cm. upper border of pelvic bone. Defence wound over palmer aspect of No.1 left little finger incised wound 1½ cm. x ½ cm. x muscle deep left index finger. Incised wound 1 ½ cm. x ½ cm x muscle deep and third one in middle finger, incised wound 1 ½ cm. x ½ cm. x muscle deep. Internal injuries:- Injury No.4 cutting the soft tissues, trachea, blood vessels oesophagus, Injury No.10 & 11 upto peritonium. He has stated that all the injuries were ante-mortem in nature, caused by sharp edged weapon and the death was caused due to hemorrhage and shock, as a result of cut throat. He has proved the post-mortem report of Balbir Singh to be in his pen and signature, which was marked as Exhibit-3. He has stated that all the injuries were ante-mortem in nature, caused by sharp edged weapon and the death was caused due to hemorrhage and shock, as a result of cut throat. He has proved the post-mortem report of Balbir Singh to be in his pen and signature, which was marked as Exhibit-3. On the same day, he had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Darshan Kaur and had found the following injuries on her dead body:- Injuries 1. Incised wound measuring 2 ½ cm. x 1 cm x muscle deep over right side of the neck, 2 cm. below right ear. 2. Incised wound 4 cm x1 ½ cm x bone deep over left side of the face, 8 cm below left eye and 2 cm above chin. 3. Incised wound 3 cm x ½ cm x muscle deep over left side of the neck 7 cm below left ear and 6 cm. above left clavicle. 4. Incised wound 2 cm x ½ cm x muscle deep over left side of the neck, 3 cm. below mandibular border and 7 cm above left collarbone. 5. Incised wound 2 ½ cm x 1/2 cm x muscle deep, 5 cm below mandibular border and 6 cm. above left clavicle. 6. Incised wound 2 ½ cm x ½ cm x soft tissue deep front of middle of neck, 5 cm below mandible and 5 cm above left clavicle, cutting the soft tissue, trachea, blood vessels and oesophagus. 7. Incised wound 2 cm x ½ cm x bone deep front of chest and middle of the chest. 8. Incised wound 3 cm x ½ cm x muscle deep front of chest, 16 cm and 15 cm above right & left nipple. 9. Incised wound 2 ½ cm x 1 cm x muscle deep right side of the neck 7 cm below right ear. 10. Incised wound ½ cm x ½ cm x muscle deep over left thumb. 11. Incised wound 2 ½ cm. x ½ cm x muscle deep over left index finger. 12. Incised wound 2 cm. x 1/2 cm. x muscle deep over left ring finger. 13. Incised wound 2 cm x ½ cm. x muscle deep over left middle finger. 14. incised wound 3 cm. x ½ cm. x muscle deep over left scapular region, 6 cm. below nape of neck. 12. Incised wound 2 cm. x 1/2 cm. x muscle deep over left ring finger. 13. Incised wound 2 cm x ½ cm. x muscle deep over left middle finger. 14. incised wound 3 cm. x ½ cm. x muscle deep over left scapular region, 6 cm. below nape of neck. Internal Injuries :- (1) Injury No.6 cutting the soft tissues, trachea, blood vessels and oesophagus. (2) Injury No.7 cutting the clavicle. (3) Contusion of both right and left parietal and occipital lobes of brain. He has stated that all the injuries were ante-mortem in nature, caused by sharp cutting weapon and the death was due to hemorrhage and shock as a result of cut throat. He has proved the post-mortem report of Darshan Kaur to be in his pen and signature, which was marked as Exhibit-3/1. In his cross-examination, this witness has stated that the injuries could be caused by bhujali and hexa blade. He has also stated that the hexa blade is a sharp cutting weapon and the injuries, if inflicted, by hexa blade shall be as sharp cutting weapon. 10. P.W.-9 Raj Kumar Mishra is a Judicial Magistrate, in whose presence the T.I. Parade of the accused was done. He has stated that the accused was put in the ratio of 1 : 9 persons. He was identified by the witnesses one by one. He has stated that Gopal Krishna Bhatia had not identified the accused, whereas witnesses Radha and Surabhi had identified the accused in the T.I.P. He has proved the T.I.P chart to be in his pen and signature, which was marked as Exhibit-10. 11. P.W.-8 Birendra Prasad Yadav is the I.O. of the case. This witness had stated that on 02.09.2005, he was posted as Officer-Incharge of Sakchi Police Station. At about 5:00 A.M, he was informed that two persons had been murdered in the Gurudwara Basti. He made the sanha entry of the information and proceeded towards the place of occurrence along-with the police party. He reached the place of occurrence and found the room locked from outside and there were bloodstains on the door also. He peeped into the room through the gap of the door and saw that two dead bodies were lying on the floor. He recorded the fardbeyan of the informant Bijay Kumar and he has proved the fardbeyan which was marked as Exhibit-4. He peeped into the room through the gap of the door and saw that two dead bodies were lying on the floor. He recorded the fardbeyan of the informant Bijay Kumar and he has proved the fardbeyan which was marked as Exhibit-4. He has stated that he took over the charge of investigation at the place of occurrence itself, and the formal FIR was also instituted on the basis of the fardbeyan, which he has proved and the same was marked as Exhibit-5. He has proved his signature on the fardbeyan as Exhibit-2/2. This witness has stated that he prepared the inquest reports of the dead bodies and he has proved the inquest reports which were marked as Exhibits-6 & 6/1. He sent the dead bodies for post-mortem examination. He has given the details of the place of occurrence and has stated that the dead bodies were found on the floor between the cot and iron almirah, in the pool of blood, situated in the eastern room of the house. He recorded the re-statement of the informant. He recorded the statements of the witnesses and he also seized the bloodstained half shirt and cloth and prepared the seizure list, which he has proved and the same was marked as Exhibit-7. In course of investigation, he was informed that one relative of the deceased Balbir Singh was living at Ranchi, situated at A.G. Colony, House No.177, who was working as S.D.O., in the Electricity Department and the details of the accused tallied with one of his sons. He visited that house, where Charanjit Singh and Ranjit Singh @ Raju were present. He brought the Ranjit Singh @ Raju to Sakchi Police Station, who made the confessional statement before him. He arrested the accused after preparing the arrest warrant which he proved and the same was marked as Exhibit-8. He has stated that on the basis of the confessional statement, he recovered the hexa blade in four pieces and prepared the seizure list. He has proved his signature on the confessional statement, which was marked as Exhibit-2/3 and the signatures of the accused on all the pages of confessional statement were marked Exhibits-2/4 to 2/7. He has stated that on the basis of the confessional statement, he recovered the hexa blade in four pieces and prepared the seizure list. He has proved his signature on the confessional statement, which was marked as Exhibit-2/3 and the signatures of the accused on all the pages of confessional statement were marked Exhibits-2/4 to 2/7. He has also proved the seizure list of the pieces of hexa blades which was marked as Exhibit -7/1 and has stated that the broken pieces of hexa blade were recovered from near the iron almirah in the room. He has also stated that he recovered a knife wrapped in a blue polythene on the basis of the confessional statement of the accused, from a drain in Arpat Road and prepared the seizure list. He has proved this seizure list also, which was marked Exhibit 7/2. He has also produced the four broken pieces of hexa blade and knife in the Court. The pieces of hexa blade were marked as Material Exhibits-1 to 1/3 and the knife was marked as Material Exhibit-2. The envelop in which the weapons were brought, were also marked as material Exhibits-3 & 3/1. This witness has also stated that he got the T.I. Parade conducted, for which he had given an application before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, which he has proved and the same was marked as Exhibit-9. The T.I Parade was conducted at Sakchi Jail, He got the post-mortem reports. He has identified the accused in the Court, and has stated that he submitted the charge-sheet against the accused. In his cross-examination, this witness has stated that according to the seizure list, the knife was wrapped in blue polythene, but that blue polythene was not in the Court. He has stated that he has no knowledge that the seizure list witnesses were the relatives of the deceased. He has also stated that he did not get the forensic examination done of the seized articles. He has stated that before breaking the lock of the room, he had not taken the help of any finger print expert nor he had explained to the witnesses that he was going to break the lock. He had not prepared any seizure list of the lock. He has stated that before breaking the lock of the room, he had not taken the help of any finger print expert nor he had explained to the witnesses that he was going to break the lock. He had not prepared any seizure list of the lock. He had not seized the blood from the place of occurrence and he had not made any investigation about the bloodstained cloths recovered from the place of occurrence. He did not get the place of occurrence photographed, nor any sketch map was prepared. He did not make any investigation whether the accused was also known as 'Sonu' or not. He has denied the suggestion of making faulty investigation. 12. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., wherein he has denied the evidence against him. No evidence was adduced by the defence. On the basis of the evidence on record, the accused appellant has been convicted and sentenced by the Trial Court below for the offence as aforesaid. 13. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the impugned Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence passed by the Trial Court below cannot be sustained in the eyes of law, inasmuch as, the prosecution has failed to bring home the charge against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts. It is submitted by the learned counsel that there is nothing on record to show that the hexa blades or the knife were bloodstained, and even the seizure list witnesses of these seizures have not been examined in the Court below. It is further submitted by the learned counsel that as the hexa blades are shown to be recovered from near the iron almirah, as such there is nothing to show that it was so concealed that it could not be recovered at the time of recovery of the dead bodies itself. Learned counsel also submitted that it is admitted by the I.O., that neither the bloodstained cloths nor the weapons were sent for any forensic examination and as such, there was nothing to show that the deceased persons were murdered by the accused with the said recovered weapons. Learned counsel also submitted that it is admitted by the I.O., that neither the bloodstained cloths nor the weapons were sent for any forensic examination and as such, there was nothing to show that the deceased persons were murdered by the accused with the said recovered weapons. Learned counsel further submitted that the identification of the accused by the children has no force in the eyes of law, as it is admitted that after three days of the occurrence, the police had brought the accused to the place of occurrence and as such, the accused was made to identify by the witnesses. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Debapriya Pal Vs. State of West Bengal, reported in AIR 2017 SC 1246 . Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that since the prosecution has failed to bring home the charge against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts, it is a fit case in which the accused ought to have been given at least the benefits of doubt. 14. Learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, has opposed the prayer, submitting that P.W.-3 Surabhi Munda and P.W.-5 Radha Bhati are the child witnesses, who were sleeping with the deceased, Darshan Kaur and these witnesses had seen the accused when he had arrived in the house in the night of occurrence, disclosing his name as 'Sonu'. P.W.-3 Surabhi Munda had also given him a glass of water upon being asked by Darshan Kaur. They had also seen this accused assaulting the deceased also, but the accused informed them that the lady had got some fits and asked them to go to sleep. Both these witnesses have identified the accused in the Court, stating that this accused had entered into the house in the night, disclosing his name as ‘Sonu’ and he was entertained by the lady of the house and after some talks with her, he was asked to go to sleep. Both these witnesses have identified the accused in the Court, stating that this accused had entered into the house in the night, disclosing his name as ‘Sonu’ and he was entertained by the lady of the house and after some talks with her, he was asked to go to sleep. P.W.-4 Gopal Krishna Bhatia, who is a tenant of the deceased and the father of P.W.-5 Radha Bhati, had also an occasion to see the accused when both children had gone to inform him and he had also seen the accused and all these three witnesses have identified the accused in the Court, stating that this accused was the person who had entered the house in the night. Learned counsel submitted that the confessional statement of the accused had led to the recoveries of knife and the broken pieces of hexa blade and the post-mortem reports show that there were 12 incised injuries on the dead body of Balbir Singh, whereas 14 incised injuries were on the dead body of Darshan Kaur, including cutting of neck of both the deceased, which showed the brutality in which both the deceased had been done to death. Learned counsel accordingly, submitted that the prosecution has been able to bring home the charge against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts and there is no illegality in the impugned Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence passed by the Trial Court below. 15. Having heard the learned counsels for both the sides and upon going through the record, we find that the prosecution case is fully supported and proved by the evidence of the child witnesses, viz., P.W.-3 Surabhi Munda and P.W.-5 Radha Bhati, who are also the eyewitnesses to the part of the occurrence. Both these witnesses have given in detail as to how the accused entered the house, stating that he was ‘Sonu’. He was entertained by the house lady and was offered a glass of water, which was given to him by P.W.-3 Surabhi Munda. He was also given a place to sleep in the house and thereafter, all of them went to sleep. This clearly shows that the accused was known to the house lady from before. He was entertained by the house lady and was offered a glass of water, which was given to him by P.W.-3 Surabhi Munda. He was also given a place to sleep in the house and thereafter, all of them went to sleep. This clearly shows that the accused was known to the house lady from before. Thereafter, on the alarm raised by the lady, both these child witnesses went towards the room of Balbir Singh where they saw the same person, assaulting the deceased, and upon seeing them the accused came out of the room, told them that Dadi was shouting due to some fits, and asked them to go and sleep. Both the children thereafter informed P.W.-4 Gopal Krishna Bhatia, the tenant in the house and the father of P.W.-5 Radha Bhatia, who also came down and the accused again came out of the room and also asked him to go and sleep, informing that the lady had got some fits. It was only in the morning when they came down, they found the room of the house locked and ultimately, both the dead bodies were found in the house, after arrival of the police, and breaking the lock by the police in the presence of the aforesaid witnesses, as also in presence of P.W.-1 Arindrajeet Singh and P.W.-6 Bijay Kumar, the informant. Both the child witnesses P.W.-3 Surabhi Munda and P.W.-5 Radha Bhati, have fully supported the case and have identified the accused in the Court, stating that he is the same person who had entered the house in the night of occurrence, disclosing his name as 'Sonu'. P.W.-3 Surabhi Munda and P.W.-5 Radha Bhati have also identified the accused in the T.I. Parade, and simply because of the fact that the accused was brought to the place of occurrence after 3-4 days of the occurrence in course of investigation, it cannot be said that they were made to identify the accused in the T.I. Parade. P.W.-4 Gopal Krishna Bhatia has also fully supported the prosecution case. Though he could not identify the accused in the T.I. Parade, but he has identified the accused in the Court stating that he had seen the accused in the night of occurrence. P.W.-4 Gopal Krishna Bhatia has also fully supported the prosecution case. Though he could not identify the accused in the T.I. Parade, but he has identified the accused in the Court stating that he had seen the accused in the night of occurrence. We also find from the statement of the accused recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., that no question was put to him regarding the recovery of the weapons on the basis of his confessional statement, and this circumstance could not be taken against the accused, but the fact remains that he has been identified by three witnesses, who were present in the house in the night of the occurrence, and both the child witnesses had also seen him assaulting the deceased. As such, the fact that this question was not put to the accused in his statement recorded under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., is not at all material. The evidence of P.W.-2 Dr. Jakka Sriniwas Rao and the post-mortem reports of both the deceased proved by him as Exhibits-3 and 3/1, clearly show that there were 12 incised wounds on the dead body of the deceased Balbir Singh, and 14 incised wounds were on the dead body of the deceased Darshan Kaur, including the wounds cutting their necks and the vital organs beneath, and the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause the death. The evidence of the Doctor and the post-mortem reports also show that the dimension of the injuries on both the deceased indicate that all the injuries were inflicted by the same sharp cutting weapon. The I.O. P.W.-8 Birendra Prasad Yadav had recovered the knife from a drain, and in that view of the matter, even if no blood stain was found on it, it is not going to make any difference in the prosecution case. Though the motive behind the crime is neither stated nor proved, but in view of the eyewitness account, the motive is immaterial in this case. Though the motive behind the crime is neither stated nor proved, but in view of the eyewitness account, the motive is immaterial in this case. In view of the evidence of both the child witnesses, namely, P.W.-3 Surabhi Munda and P.W.-5 Radha Bhatia, coupled with the evidence of P.W.-4 Gopal Krishna Bhatia, who had also seen the accused in the house, we are of the considered view that the prosecution has been able to bring home the charge against the accused beyond all reasonable doubts, and there is absolutely no scope of any legitimate doubt that the offence was not committed by the accused facing the Trial. As such, we find no illegality in the impugned Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence passed by the Trial Court below, worth interference by this Court. 16. For the forgoing reasons, we do not find any illegality in the impugned Judgment of conviction dated 14.03.2007 and Order of sentence dated 16.03.2007, passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum at Jamshedpur, in Sessions Trial No.481 of 2005, convicting and sentencing the appellant, Ranjit Singh @ Raju, for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, which we hereby, affirm. The appellant, Ranjit Singh @ Raju is already in custody, undergoing the sentence. In the facts of this case, and taking into account the fact that two murders were committed in a very brutal manner, we hereby, clarify that the sentence of imprisonment for life imposed upon the appellant shall mean 'imprisonment throughout his biological life'. 17. We do not find any merit in this appeal, which is accordingly, dismissed. Let the Lower Court Records be sent back to the Court concerned forthwith, along-with the copy of this Judgment. Appeal dismissed