JUDGMENT : V.K. Jadhav, J. This is an appeal preferred by the State against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.1.2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hingoli in Sessions Case No.16 of 2001. The Division Bench of this Court (Coram : T V Nalawade & A.M. Dhavale, JJ.) has heard this appeal, however, they are divided in opinion. Consequently, in terms of the provisions of section 392 of the Criminal Procedure Code read with Rule 7 Chapter I of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, this appeal has been laid before this Court under the orders of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice. 2. A brief fact of the prosecution case are as follows :- [a] As per the prosecution story, accused nos. 1 to 4 on or before 19.11.2000 at about 06.30 p.m. at Mastansha-nagar locality, Hingoli in furtherance of their common intention committed the murder of Shaikh Habib s/o Shaikh Nabi intentionally or knowingly causing his death, assaulting him by means of knives and inflicting the injuries on his chest, thigh and legs. On the basis of the First Information Report dated 19.11.2000 exh.44, lodged by PW 9 Shaikh Amjad at about 09.30 p.m in Hingoli City police Station, Crime No.161 of 2000 came to be registered for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. As per the prosecution story, three incidents had taken place with succession. Some three to four days prior to 19.11.2000 first incident had taken place at about 02.30 p.m. when PW 9 Shaikh Amjad was proceeding on his bicycle by the side of the Bakra Market at Hingoli and there was an accidental dash of his bicycle to accused no.4 Vishal, which resulted into verbal exchange and abuses. Second incident had taken place on 19.11.2000 at about 4 to 4.30 p.m. when PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and deceased Habib were chitchatting near a well in Mastanshanagar, Hingoli, and all the accused persons came there, abused them and extended beating to them with slaps and fist blows followed by threatening. At about 06.30 p.m. on the same date and spot, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and deceased Habib were present near the well. All four accused came there, abused them in filthy language and suddenly made assault on them. Accused No.4 Vishal and accused No.3 Baba were armed with knives. At about 06.30 p.m. on the same date and spot, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and deceased Habib were present near the well. All four accused came there, abused them in filthy language and suddenly made assault on them. Accused No.4 Vishal and accused No.3 Baba were armed with knives. All the four accused made deceased Habib to fall down on the ground. Accused No.2 Vijay and accused no.1 Sanjay had pressed him down and accused No.4 Vishal inflicted a knife blow on the chest of deceased Habib, while accused No.3 Baba inflicted a knife blow on his waist. [b] On the same day at about 09.30 p.m. on the basis of the FIR lodged by PW 9 Shaikh Amjad, crime no.161 of 2000 came to be registered. In the opinion of the Medical Officer, who has conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body, deceased Habib died due to cardio respiratory arrest due to hemorrhagic shock due to injury on the right lung. Postmortem report is marked at exh.37. Prosecution claims that there are three more eye witnesses to the incident namely PW 11 Shaikh Sadik Shaikh Sattar, PW 14 Shaikh Ahemad Shaikh Daud, and PW 15 Shaikh Karim Shaikh Khaja. PW 16 PSI Pratapsingh Deelsingh Shikare has carried out the investigation into the crime. During the course of the investigation, the investigating officer has carried out the spot panchnama, inquest panchnama and further the knives allegedly used in the assault came to be recovered at the instance of accused nos. 3 and 4 respectively. As per the CA report, human blood was found on the clothes of the accused and so also on the knives. On completion of the investigation, PW 16 PSI Shikare submitted charge sheet against all the accused persons. [c] The learned Judge of the trial court has framed the charge against all the accused for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code. All accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed to be tried. Prosecution has examined in all sixteen witnesses to substantiate the charges levelled against the accused. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of each of the accused persons under section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code came to be recorded. The defence of the accused persons was of total denial and false implication. Prosecution has examined in all sixteen witnesses to substantiate the charges levelled against the accused. After completion of the prosecution evidence, the statement of each of the accused persons under section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code came to be recorded. The defence of the accused persons was of total denial and false implication. After hearing the prosecution so also the defence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hingoli by judgment and order dated 31.1.2002 acquitted all the accused for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code in Sessions Trial No. 16 of 2001. Hence, this appeal. 3. Learned APP for the appellant submits that, evidence of the eye witnesses cannot be discarded merely on the ground that they are the interested witnesses. There are four eye witnesses including the informant, however, the learned Judge of the trial court has discarded their evidence on minor inconsistencies and discrepancies. Learned APP submits that evidence of PW 9 Shaikh Amjad, PW 11 Shaikh Sadik Shaikh Sattar, PW 14 Shaikh Ahemad Shaikh Daud, and PW 15 Shaikh Karim Shaikh Khaja is consistent, reliable and trustworthy duly corroborated by the medical evidence. The eye witnesses testimony is clear and convincing. There was no reason for the eye witnesses to falsely implicate the accused persons in the serious crime like murder. Learned APP submits that, it is not necessary that all eye witnesses should specifically depose about the presence of each others, when in the facts of the case they had witnessed the actual incident from different directions and places. Learned APP submits that evidence of the eye witnesses has a ring of truth, it is cogent, credible, trust worthy, however, the learned Additional Sessions Judge has discarded their evidence in its entirety. It is well settled that where eye witnesses account is found credible and trustworthy, medical opinion pointing to alternative possibilities is not accepted as conclusive. The learned APP submits that, even the testimony of PW 9 Shaikh Amjad is sufficient to convict the accused for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of IPC. One credible witness outweighs the testimony of number of other witnesses of indefinite character. Learned APP submits that, doctrine of falsus in uno falsus in omnibus has no application and it has not received a general acceptance. It is merely a rule of caution. One credible witness outweighs the testimony of number of other witnesses of indefinite character. Learned APP submits that, doctrine of falsus in uno falsus in omnibus has no application and it has not received a general acceptance. It is merely a rule of caution. It is the duty of the court to separate grain from the chaff where chaff can be separated from grain, it would be open for the court to convict the accused notwithstanding the fact that the evidence has been found to be deficient or to be not wholly credible. The learned APP submits that the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the trial court thus needs to be quashed and set aside and the accused before the Court are liable to be convicted for the offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 of Indian Penal Code. 4. Learned APP in order to substantiate his contentions placed reliance on following judgments :- 1. Mani @ Udattu Man and others Vs. State Rep. By Inspector of Police, (2009) 4 JT 169 : 2009 (2) Supreme 356 . 2. Vithal Pundalik Zendge Vs. State of Maharashtra, (2009) AIR SC 1110. 3. Sanjay Khanderao Wadane Vs. State of Maharashtra, 2017 AIRSCW 3595. 5. Learned counsel for respondents/accused submits that PW 9 Shaikh Amjad is an highly interested witness. His pre-incident and post-incident conduct is highly suspicious. Learned counsel submits that the evidence of eye witnesses is not cogent, reliable and trust worthy. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad is not an eye witness to the incident. PW 11 Shaikh Sadik Shaikh Sattar, PW 14 Shaikh Ahemad Shaikh Daud, and PW 15 Shaikh Karim Shaikh Khaja are the got up witnesses. Their police statements came to be recorded belatedly without any explanation tendered by the Investigating officer for such belated recording of the statement. There is an inconsistency between the so called ocular evidence and the medical evidence. The so called recovery of the knives and blood stained clothes has not been proved. PW 8 Dr. Abasaheb Tatyarao Nilkanthe, Medical Officer who has conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of deceased Shaikh Habib s/o Shaikh Nabi has opined that injury No.1 which is fatal injury is not possible by the use of the weapon article no.13 and 14 respectively before the Court. PW 8 Dr. Abasaheb Tatyarao Nilkanthe, Medical Officer who has conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of deceased Shaikh Habib s/o Shaikh Nabi has opined that injury No.1 which is fatal injury is not possible by the use of the weapon article no.13 and 14 respectively before the Court. Learned counsel submits that in the facts of the case, it is not possible to separate the truth, if any, from falsehood and, thus, the only available course to be made is to discard the evidence in toto. The learned Judge of the trial court has rightly discarded the prosecution evidence and acquitted the accused. 6. There is no dispute that deceased Habib met with the homicidal death. Prosecution has duly proved the postmortem report exh.37 through PW 8 Dr. Nilkante. PW 8 Dr. Nilkante in column no.17 of the postmortem report exh.37 has mentioned [i] stab wound on the right side of chest, [ii] incised wound on right thigh and [iii] incised wound on left leg. Injury number [i] stab wound on the right side of chest causing damage to the lungs. There need no further discussion so far as homicidal death of deceased Habib is concerned. Prosecution has proved the homicidal death of deceased Habib. 7. Pw 9 Shaikh Amjad is the prime witness. First incident had occurred 2-4 days prior to the main incident dated 19.11.2000. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad was proceeding on his bicycle and near the fish market, there was a dash of his bicycle to accused no.4 Vishal. Said dash of bicycle had given rise to the quarrel between them. On 19.11.2000 at about 4 to 4.30 p.m., informant Shaikh Amjad was chitchatting with deceased Habib near a well in Mastansha Nagar. All the accused persons came there. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and deceased Habib were subjected to beating. All the accused persons had questioned them as to why they have become insolent and arrogant and further threatened them by saying that they would see them. All the accused thereafter left that place. On the same day, at about 6.00 to 06.30 p.m. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and deceased Shaikh Habib stood near the same well and at that time accused came there. The last and final incident had taken place at that time. All the accused persons had come to the spot. All the accused thereafter left that place. On the same day, at about 6.00 to 06.30 p.m. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and deceased Shaikh Habib stood near the same well and at that time accused came there. The last and final incident had taken place at that time. All the accused persons had come to the spot. They had abused PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and deceased Habib in filthy language. All the four accused had assaulted them. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad rescued himself from their clutches and ran away. All the four accused made deceased Habib to fell down on the ground. Thereafter, accused Vishal and accused Baba took out the knives. Accused Vishal gave a knife blow on the chest of deceased Habib and accused Baba gave a knife blow on the upper part of the right thigh. However, deceased Habib got rescued from their clutches and crossed a distance about 25 to 30 feet and again fallen down on the ground. He had become unconscious as soon as he had fallen down on the ground. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad ran towards the house of the deceased Habib and again returned to the spot alongwith the brother of the deceased Habib namely Ramzu. Thereafter, he himself and Ramzu took the deceased Habib to the Police Station in an auto rickshaw. After obtaining the letter from the police, they took the deceased Habib to Civil Hospital. However, deceased Habib died within 10 to 15 minutes while under treatment. 8. In the backdrop of all these facts, conduct of PW 9 Shaikh Amjad assumes much importance. His pre-incident and post-incident conduct is material, relevant and important. Fate of the prosecution case entirely rest upon the appreciation of evidence of PW 9 Shaikh Amjad. 9. The following inconsistencies, improbabilities, inconceivable conduct of the eye witnesses coupled with other evidence constrained myself to accept the findings recorded by the trial court. I am aware that said reaction from any eye witness cannot be expected on seeing the incident like murder. However, if the reaction so demonstrated is improbable or so inconceivable, such a reaction would be unnatural reaction. It is also well settled that maxim "uno falsus in omnibus" has no application in our criminal jurisprudence. I am aware that said reaction from any eye witness cannot be expected on seeing the incident like murder. However, if the reaction so demonstrated is improbable or so inconceivable, such a reaction would be unnatural reaction. It is also well settled that maxim "uno falsus in omnibus" has no application in our criminal jurisprudence. The witnesses sometime speaking an untruth in some aspect, however, it has to be appraised in each case as to in what extent the evidence is worthy of acceptance. It is well known that one hardly comes across a witness whose evidence does not contain a grain of untruth or at any rate exaggeration, embroideries or embellishment. An attempt has to be made to separate the truth from falsehood and if the same is not possible, the only available course to be made is to discard the evidence in toto. [i] So far as the first incident which had taken place two to three days prior to 19.11.2000 is concerned, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad had a quarrel with accused No.4 Vishal on account of the dash of the bicycle. Thus, in all the probabilities, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad could have been the sole target of the accused persons, if at all the quarrel had been commenced on account of the said incident. [ii] It has not come in the evidence of any witness or even it is not the prosecution case that PW 9 Shaikh Amjad had called upon the deceased Habib to help/protect him or deceased Habib on his own had undertaken to protect the PW 9 Shaikh Amjad. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad on the other hand has stated in his cross-examination that he was knowing the deceased Habib only two to four days prior to the incident. It is thus very unlikely that on 19.11.2000 at about 4.00 p.m. to 4.30 p.m. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and deceased Habib had gone near the well. According to PW 9 Shaikh Amjad they met with each other near the well. [iii] So far as the incident which had taken place on 19.11.2000 at about 04.00 p.m. to 4.30 p.m. near the well there was no reason for the accused persons to extend the beating to deceased Habib only for the reason that he was present along with PW 9 Shaikh Amjad near the well. [iii] So far as the incident which had taken place on 19.11.2000 at about 04.00 p.m. to 4.30 p.m. near the well there was no reason for the accused persons to extend the beating to deceased Habib only for the reason that he was present along with PW 9 Shaikh Amjad near the well. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad in his cross-examination has stated that there was a scuffle between them and the accused and all were dragging each other. Assuming that PW 9 Shaikh Amjad has not stated the complete truth as to what actually happened near the well, however, assuming that PW 9 Shaikh Amjad along with the deceased Habib had quarreled with the accused near the well also, in all probabilities the main incident could not have been occurred near the well at about 06.00 p.m. to 06.30 p.m. on the same day. [iv] PW 9 Shaikh Amjad has deposed that on that day at about 06.00 p.m. to 06.30 p.m. he himself and deceased Habib were standing near the same well. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad has stated in his cross-examination that deceased Habib was already standing near the well and he had gone there subsequently. There was no special reason for him to go the well at that time. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad has also admitted that the way from his house is different than the way to the house of deceased Habib to the well. In the incident which had taken place at about 04.00 p.m. to 04.30 p.m. on the same day at the same spot, if at all the accused persons had given threats, there was no reason for PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and deceased Habib to visit the same spot at about 06.00 p.m. to 06.30 p.m. [v] PW 9 Shaikh Amjad has given all the details of the main incident. Such as accused Vishal gave a blow of knife on the chest of deceased Habib and accused Baba (who is no more) gave a knife blow on the upper part of right thigh and that deceased Habib got escaped himself from their hands and crossed a distance of 25 to 30 feets and fallen down. Such as accused Vishal gave a blow of knife on the chest of deceased Habib and accused Baba (who is no more) gave a knife blow on the upper part of right thigh and that deceased Habib got escaped himself from their hands and crossed a distance of 25 to 30 feets and fallen down. This part of the evidence of PW 9 Shaikh Amjad is unbelievable for the following reasons :- [a] PW 9 Shaikh Amjad got escaped unhurt from the hands of the accused ; b] though, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad rescued himself from the clutches of the accused and ran away from the spot, he stood at a distance of 15 to 20 feet and witnessed the incident ; c] he did not hide himself and standing on the road itself ; d] none of the accused had tried to assault him or chase him ; e] none has come from the house of deceased Habib on hearing his shouts "Bachao Bachao" when the house of deceased Habib is situated at a distance of 60 to 70 feet only f] PW 9 Shaikh Amjad had not tried to protect the deceased Habib, in any manner, at the time of the actual incident when the said incident of beating and assault on deceased Habib remained continued for 10 to 15 minutes. [vi] PW 9 Shaikh Amjad has not given reference of name of any other persons witnessing the incident. At the same time, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad returned to the spot alongwith the brother of deceased Habib PW 10 Ramzu, where deceased Habib was lying. PW 10 Ramzu has not deposed about the presence of the accused persons on the spot or near the spot. It is pertinent that even though deceased Habib was taken in autorickshaw to the concerned police station from the spot of the incident by PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and PW 10 Ramzu in auto-rickshaw, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad had not disclosed the details of the incident to PW 10 Ramzu. According to PW 10 Ramzu, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad had informed to him and and his father in the house that deceased Habib was being beaten. In all the probabilities, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad would have disclosed the names of the assailants to the father and brother of deceased Habib. According to PW 10 Ramzu, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad had informed to him and and his father in the house that deceased Habib was being beaten. In all the probabilities, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad would have disclosed the names of the assailants to the father and brother of deceased Habib. It is also difficult to believe that even PW 9 Shaikh Amjad had not disclosed the incident in detail including the names of the assailants to PW 10 Ramzu during journey in auto-rickshaw from the spot towards the police station. PW 9 Shaikh Amjad has not even disclosed the names of the assailants in the police station. Though, the set of reaction from any eye witness on seeing the incident like murder cannot be expected, however, pre-incident and post-incident conduct and reaction during the course of the incident of PW 9 Shaikh Amjad is improbable and inconceivable. It is difficult to separate the truth from the falsehood. The learned Judge of the Trial Court has rightly discarded the evidence of PW 9 Shaikh Amjad, in toto. Even other evidence on record supports the conclusion arrived at by the learned Judge of the trial court. 10. Pw 9 Shaikh Amjad had lodged the complaint on the same day at about 21.30 hours in the concerned police station, however, till that time, name of PW 9 Shaikh Amjad had not come on record anywhere either in the police station or in the hospital. On the other hand, PW 16 Investigating Officer PSI Shikare has stated in paragraph no.4 of his cross-examination that it had transpired in the investigation that the brother and father of the injured were accompanying him when he was brought to the police station. According to PW 10 Ramzu, deceased Habib has made a statement to the police officer in the police station. PW 10 Shaikh Ramzu in paragraph no.3 of his cross-examination has stated that something like signature or thumb impression of the deceased Habib was obtained by the police after recording the statement of deceased Habib. However, the said statement of deceased Habib came to be suppressed by the prosecution. PW 16 PSI Shikare, the Investigating Officer has denied that the statement of deceased Habib was recorded in the police station, however, admittedly, he was not present when deceased Habib was brought to the police station. However, the said statement of deceased Habib came to be suppressed by the prosecution. PW 16 PSI Shikare, the Investigating Officer has denied that the statement of deceased Habib was recorded in the police station, however, admittedly, he was not present when deceased Habib was brought to the police station. Prosecution has not examined the P.S.O. of the police station, who has given 'Yadi' to the injured for taking the injured to the hospital. It is also pertinent that even though blood was oozing from the injuries sustained by deceased Habib and he was actually kept in the auto-rickshaw by PW 9 Shaikh Amjad and PW 10 Ramzu, blood stains did not appear on the clothes of PW 9 Shaikh Amjad. It is also pertinent that no blood was found on the spot even though deceased Habib bleed profusely. PW 16 the Investigating Officer PSI Shikare has admitted in his cross-examination that he has not found blood anywhere on the scene of occurrence. He had seen the spot where injured was lying however, no blood was found on the spot as well. 11. Pw 9 Shaikh Amjad has, however, attributed a specific role to accused Vishal. According to him, accused Vishal inflicted injury on the chest of deceased Habib with the help of knife. As per the postmortem report exh.37, there is a stab wound on the right side of the chest. The cause of death was cardio-respiratory arrest due to hemorrhagic shock due to injury to right lung. Thus, the question arises as to how PW 9 Shaikh Amjad has described in detail the injury on the specific part of the body of the deceased alongwith specification of the weapon and so also the assailant. It appears that, PW 9 Shaikh Amjad had lodged the complaint at about 21.30 hours in the police station. However, there is an inordinate delay in forwarding the FIR to the Magistrate. PW 16 I.O. PSI Shikare was subjected to cross-examination on this point. However, he has failed to give any satisfactory explanation for such a delay. As per the copy of the FIR exh.44 FIR has been forwarded to the Magistrate on 22.11.2000. Thus, such an inordinate delay in forwarding the FIR to the Magistrate would be the another ground for discarding the prosecution case. 12. However, he has failed to give any satisfactory explanation for such a delay. As per the copy of the FIR exh.44 FIR has been forwarded to the Magistrate on 22.11.2000. Thus, such an inordinate delay in forwarding the FIR to the Magistrate would be the another ground for discarding the prosecution case. 12. So far as the recovery of the weapons article 13 and 14 are concerned, in the opinion of PW 8 Dr. Abasaheb Nilkanthe that none of these two weapons caused first mentioned wound i.e. stab wound on the chest. Thus, the recovery of the weapons at the instance of the accused persons and so called blood on it looses its significance. Though, there are blood stains on the clothes of the accused seized during the course of the investigation, only human blood has been detected and the results are inconclusive so far as blood group is concerned. 13. So far as the other eye witnesses i.e. PW 11 Shaikh Sajid, PW 14 Shaikh Ahemad and PW 15 Shaikh Karim are concerned, their evidence is not consistent, reliable and trust worthy. They have contradicted each other on material aspects. They have also improved the prosecution story. Furthermore, their police statements came to be recorded belatedly. The Investigating Officer has not explained the delay in recording their statements. Furthermore, they are not the independent eye witnesses. They are the interested witnesses. They have approached the Investigating Officer on their own posing themselves as eye witness to the incident. They have not deposed about the presence of each other at the time of the alleged incident. All the eye witnesses including PW 9 Shaikh Amjad failed to explain the third injuries on the left leg of deceased Habib. 14. In view of the above, I do not find any fault in the view taken by the learned Judge of the Trial Court. Hence, following order. ORDER 1. Criminal appeal is hereby dismissed. 2. Criminal Appeal accordingly disposed off.