JUDGMENT Sandeep Mehta, J. - The appellants herein have been convicted and sentenced as below vide judgment dated 03.10.2015, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.1, Barmer in Sessions Case No.80/2009:- Jagdish @ Jagiya Offences Under Sections Sentences Fine Fine Default sentences 302 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.25,000/- 1 years imprisonment Hemaram @ Hemant Kumar and Raju Offences Under Sections Sentences Fine Fine Default sentences 302/34 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs.25,000/ 1 years imprisonment 457 IPC 3 Years S.I. Rs.5,000/- 6 Months imprisonment 2. All the substantive sentences awarded to the accused were ordered to run concurrently. 3. Being aggrieved of their conviction and sentences, the appellants have preferred these appeals under Section 374(2) Cr.P.C. 4. Since all these appeals arise out of a common Judgment, the same are being decided together. 5. Brief facts relevant and essential for the disposal of the present appeals are noted hereinbelow:- Natharam, Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Bhadkha, submitted a written report (Ex.P/1) to the SHO, Police Station Sadar Barmer at the Bhadkha Jarnanathji Math on 18.08.2009 at 11.00 am. alleging inter alia that in the previous midnight, Shri Purannath Ji Chela Chaturnathji being the Mathadheesh of the Math, was sleeping on a Charpai in the chowk located inside the pole (big gate) of the Math. In the morning at about 07.00 am., his Sevak Jagdish son of Poonamaram, went inside the Math and saw that Purannath's face was covered with a Gudri (bedding) and his clothes were strewn around. A gold Kada weighing 25 tolas with Lion's head, which the Mahant always used to wear, was missing from his wrist. Purannath did not respond to the calls of Jagdish on which, he approached the villagers Babulal son of Rikhabdas, Madanlal son of Chintaman Das and Kapchand son of Rikhabdas and informed them of the incident. All these persons went to the spot and saw the foot marks of some persons near the Charpai of Purannath. Natharam alleged in the report that some unknown persons had murdered Purannath and had looted his gold Kada and cash from his pocket. On the basis of the report aforesaid, an FIR No.284/2009 (Ex.P/2) was registered at the Police Station Sadar Barmer for the offences under Sections 302 and 460 IPC. The investigation was assigned to Shri Ramesh Kumar Sharma, SHO, Police Station Sadar Barmer. The Forensic team was called alongwith a photographer from the S.P. Office, Barmer. On the basis of the report aforesaid, an FIR No.284/2009 (Ex.P/2) was registered at the Police Station Sadar Barmer for the offences under Sections 302 and 460 IPC. The investigation was assigned to Shri Ramesh Kumar Sharma, SHO, Police Station Sadar Barmer. The Forensic team was called alongwith a photographer from the S.P. Office, Barmer. The place of the incident was photographed. The site inspection memo was prepared. The Forensic team lifted the foot moulds of the suspects from the place of the incident. The Surathaal Lash and the Panchayatnama Lash memos were prepared. The body of the Mahant was subjected to postmortem and then, was handed over to the concerned people for cremation. The accused were arrested in the following order: (i) Jagdish @ Jagiya vide arrest memo (Ex.P/32) dated 22.08.2009 at 02.30 pm. (ii) Hema Ram @ Hemant Kumar vide arrest memo (Ex.P/30) dated 22.08.2009 at 02.45 pm. (iii) Raju vide arrest memo (Ex.P/31) dated 22.08.2009 at 03.15 pm. 6. The accused Jagdish, who was arrested at the first instance, allegedly gave an information to the I.O. under Section 27 of the Evidence Act which was taken down in memorandum (Ex.P/50). It is alleged that the I.O. acting in furtherance of the said information, recovered a sum of Rs.55,000/- from the possession of the accused Jagdish which was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P/47). The accused Hema Ram, allegedly gave an information to the I.O. under Section 27 of the Evidence Act which was recorded in memorandum (Ex.P/51). In furtherance of this information, the I.O. claims to have recovered a melted gold piece weighing 210.060 gm. which was seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P/42). The I.O. further claims that the accused Raju gave an information (Ex.P/52) to him under Section 27 of the Evidence Act in furtherance whereof, a melted gold piece weighing 097.060 gm. was recovered and seized vide seizure memo (Ex.P/45). The I.O., also recorded the informations of all the three accused and got the place of the incident verified. The specimen foot moulds of all the three accused were got lifted through the forensic team. The footwear worn by all the accused at the time of the incident were seized. The suspected foot moulds and the specimen foot moulds were forwarded to the FSL for comparison. 7. The specimen foot moulds of all the three accused were got lifted through the forensic team. The footwear worn by all the accused at the time of the incident were seized. The suspected foot moulds and the specimen foot moulds were forwarded to the FSL for comparison. 7. The I.O. concluded investigation and filed a charge-sheet against the three accused in the concerned court for the offences under Sections 302 and 460 IPC. As the offences were triable by court of Sessions, the case was committed to the court of the Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Barmer for trial, who framed charges against the accused for the above offences. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 30 witnesses and exhibited 52 documents to prove its case. Upon being questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and when confronted with the prosecution allegations, all the three accused denied the same and claimed to have been falsely implicated by the police. The accused Hema Ram @ Hemant Kumar stated that he never visited Bhadkha. The police wrongly arrested him and forcibly took away the gold ornaments of the ladies of his family, melted them and showed a fake recovery. The accused Raju stated that he was not familiar with Jagdish and he had been falsely implicated by the police. 8. The prosecution presented its case before the trial court alleging that the accused Jagdish was lastly seen with the deceased a few days before the incident. A quarrel had taken place between the deceased and Jagdish who gave a threat that he would seek revenge. He got recovered the cash amount to the tune of Rs.55,000/- which was looted from the person of the deceased. The accused Hema Ram and Raju got recovered the gold pieces which were prepared after melting the gold Kada taken off from the body of the Mahant after killing him. The foot print impression comparison report issued by the FSL incriminates the accused to the hilt. The accused pointed out the place of incident to the I.O. On these grounds, the prosecution claimed that there was conclusive circumstantial evidence pointing towards guilt of the accused in the case. 9. The foot print impression comparison report issued by the FSL incriminates the accused to the hilt. The accused pointed out the place of incident to the I.O. On these grounds, the prosecution claimed that there was conclusive circumstantial evidence pointing towards guilt of the accused in the case. 9. On the contrary, the defence raised a plea that there was no credible evidence on the record to show that Jagdish was present inside the Math on the night of the incident as none of the prosecution witnesses being the villagers of village Bhadkha, stated that Jagdish used to sleep in the Math with the Mahant during the night; that there was no evidence on record to conclude that the recovered gold pieces were prepared from the gold Kada which was worn by the deceased. The FSL report of the foot print impression was inadmissible in evidence looking to the contradictions and infirmities in the procedure of collection as reflected from the evidence of the Tehsildar Nathuram (PW-19). On the basis of these submissions, the defence counsel sought acquittal for the accused. 10. After hearing the arguments advanced by the defence counsel and the Public Prosecutor and appreciating the evidence available on the record, the learned Trial Judge, proceeded to convict and sentence the appellants as above by the impugned judgment dated 03.10.2015 which is assailed in these appeals. 11. Learned counsel Shri Navneet Poonia representing the appellant Jagdish, Shri Arun Kumar, Advocate representing the appellant Hema Ram and Shri K.R. Bhati, Advocate representing the appellant Raju, vehemently and fervently urged that the impugned judgment is bad in facts as well as in law. There is no satisfactory evidence on the record of the case to show that the accused appellants committed lurking house trespass into the Math in the intervening night of 17.08.2009 and 18.08.2009 or that they looted the valuables from the body of the Mahant Purannath after killing him. They contended that the entire sequence of recoveries effected by the I.O. is false and fabricated. In addition thereto, it was their contention that neither the informations provided by the accused to the I.O. nor the seizure memos have been proved by leading appropriate evidence. 12. They contended that the entire sequence of recoveries effected by the I.O. is false and fabricated. In addition thereto, it was their contention that neither the informations provided by the accused to the I.O. nor the seizure memos have been proved by leading appropriate evidence. 12. Shri Navneet Poonia further contended that the allegation of last seen and motive attributed to the accused Jagdish is totally fictitious and unsubstantiated because none of the prosecution witness stated that Jagdish was present in the Math on the night of the incident or that he used to sleep there regularly. He further contended that the recovery of the amount to the tune of Rs.55,000/- effected from the accused appellant Jagdish cannot be considered incriminating in view of the fact that the seized currency notes had no distinct identifying marks so as to treat them to be those taken off the deceased Mahant. 13. Learned counsel Shri Arun Kumar representing the appellant Hema Ram and Shri K.R. Bhati, Advocate representing the appellant Raju, urged that the police has effected fabricated recovery of melted gold pieces from these two accused. That apart, in absence of any evidence to show that the gold pieces were actually prepared by melting the Kada of the deceased, no inference can be drawn that they were connected with the looted article in any manner. In arguendo, they contended that merely from the recovery of the gold pieces, no inference can be drawn against the accused appellants that they murdered the Mahant or looted his gold Kada. They further submitted that the FSL report pertaining to the foot print impressions, apart from not having been exhibited on record, is otherwise inadmissible in evidence in view of the candid admission of the Tehsildar Nathuram (PW-19) who stated that the foot moulds were not prepared in his presence. They further referred to the statement of the police officer Khetaram (PW-11), who collected the foot moulds and pointed out that neither the suspects foot moulds lifted from the place of the incident nor the specimen foot moulds of the accused were sealed. He thus urged that the FSL report procured on the basis of the unsealed foot mould impressions is of no significance whatsoever. 14. On these grounds, learned counsel representing the appellants sought reversal of the impugned judgment and craved acquittal for the appellants. 15. He thus urged that the FSL report procured on the basis of the unsealed foot mould impressions is of no significance whatsoever. 14. On these grounds, learned counsel representing the appellants sought reversal of the impugned judgment and craved acquittal for the appellants. 15. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellants' counsel. He contended that the appellant Jagdish @ Jagiya was employed by the Math to serve the Mahant. He was having a deep knowledge about the wealth of the Mahant. Filled with the greed to rob the Mahant of his wealth, the appellant Jagdish conspired with the two co-accused Hema Ram @ Hemant Kumar and Raju, trespassed into the Math on the fateful night knowing very well that the Mahant who was all alone would be sleeping in open. The three accused joined hands, broke into the Math in the cover of darkness, strangulated the Mahant and looted the 300 years old 25 tolas gold Kada worn by him and also the amount of Rs.55,000/- which the Mahant used to keep in a cloth sachet tied to his abdomen. In order to throw the villagers off the scent, the accused Jagdish, intentionally tried to mislead them by portraying his innocence and claiming that unknown assailants had killed the Mahant and had made off with his valuables. However, this evil design of the accused did not last for long and the investigating officer was successful in cracking the conspiracy. Accordingly, the accused were arrested. The accused appellant Jagdish was intrinsically linked with the murder because his foot print impressions were found at the place of occurrence. So far as the accused appellants Hema Ram and Raju are concerned, they were the ones who got the gold Kada worn by the Mahant as their share of the loot. They melted the Kada and converted it into two gold pieces and divided the same amongst themselves. So far as the accused appellants Hema Ram and Raju are concerned, they were the ones who got the gold Kada worn by the Mahant as their share of the loot. They melted the Kada and converted it into two gold pieces and divided the same amongst themselves. These melted gold pieces were recovered in furtherance of the voluntary informations provided by the two accused to the I.O. A huge sum of Rs.55,000/- was recovered at the instance of the accused Jagdish in furtherance of the information provided by him to the I.O. Neither the accused Jagdish nor the accused Hema Ram and Raju could offer an explanation for being in possession of the huge cash amount and the gold pieces respectively soon after the incident and thus, the presumption under Section 114 of the Evidence Act clearly operates against them. On these grounds, learned Public Prosecutor sought affirmation of the impugned judgment and rejection of the appeals. 16. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and have minutely re-appreciated the evidence available on the record. 17. Before elaborating upon the rival contentions, we propose to summarise in brief, evidence of the material prosecution witnesses. 18. The FIR of the murder and robbery (Ex.P/1) was lodged by Natharam, Sarpanch who was examined as PW-21 during the trial. It is categorically mentioned in the FIR that the Mathadheesh Shri Purannath Ji was sleeping alone at the Math on the night intervening 17.08.2009 and 18.08.2009. In the morning, the Sewadar Jagdish went to the Math and saw that the face of Purannath Ji was covered with a Gudri and his clothes were strewn around. The 300 years' gold Kada having lion's head weighing 25 tolas always worn by the Mathadheesh on his wrist was not to be seen. Thereupon, Jagdish rushed to the village and informed Babulal, Madanlal and Rupchandra of the incident. All these persons, went to the Math, saw the foot prints of some persons near the cot on which Purannath Ji was sleeping and also noted that the gold Kada and cash amount of the Mahant had been looted. All these facts are incorporated in the FIR. 19. All these persons, went to the Math, saw the foot prints of some persons near the cot on which Purannath Ji was sleeping and also noted that the gold Kada and cash amount of the Mahant had been looted. All these facts are incorporated in the FIR. 19. Manifestly, for finding out the fact that the cash secured by the Mahant in a cloth sachet tied to his abdomen was missing, the concerned persons must have approached the cot to check the dead body and thus, all these villagers must have trampled the suspects' foot prints which might have been available near the cot. 20. PW-1 Lakharam, who was posted as ASI, P.S. Sadar Barmer, registered the FIR on the basis of the written report submitted by the Sarpanch Natharam. 21. PW-2 Dr. Jasraj Bohra was a Member of the Medical Board which conducted the postmortem on the body of the deceased Purannath Ji and issued the postmortem report (Ex.P/2) in which, it is mentioned that there was a ligature mark on the neck which was extending till the thyroid cartilage. The chest, face and hands were cyanosed. The cause of death of Mahant Purannath was opined to be obstruction of the respiratory passage induced by strangulation. 22. PW-3 Paras Nath stood stood as a motbir to the Panchnama Lash (Ex.P.4). 23. PW-4 Rupchandra stated that the accused Jagdish @ Jagiya was employed as Sewadar in the Math for serving the Mahant. He would eat and drink at the Math as well as in his house. The witness feigned ignorance to the prosecutor's suggestion that Jagdish @ Jagiya used to sleep at the Math in the night. He further stated that 10 months ago, while he was at his house, Jagdish approached and told him that something untoward had happened to Purannath Ji. On this, the witness contacted Madanlal and Babulal and all went to the Math. They went inside and saw the deadbody of Purannath Ji lying on the cot. The gold Kada regularly worn by him on his wrist was missing. Thereafter, about 1000- 1500 persons collected at the math. The police came to the spot. The witness stated that 10-15 days before Purannath was killed, Jagdish, Lachharam, Gula Khan, Mangal Singh, etc. had sacrificed a goat and had consumed liquor in the Math. The Mahant did not consume either the liquor or the goat. Thereafter, about 1000- 1500 persons collected at the math. The police came to the spot. The witness stated that 10-15 days before Purannath was killed, Jagdish, Lachharam, Gula Khan, Mangal Singh, etc. had sacrificed a goat and had consumed liquor in the Math. The Mahant did not consume either the liquor or the goat. On the same night, a quarrel ensued between Jagdish and the Mahant during the course whereof, Jagdish threatened that he would take revenge. The Mahant often complained to the villagers that Jagdish used to steal money from him. In cross-examination, the witness admitted that the ancestors of Jagdish were serving the Mahant since three generations. When the goat was cooked in the Math, Jagdish and the Mahant quarrelled with each other. The witness was confronted with numerous omissions/ contradictions vis-a-vis his previous investigational statement (Ex.D/1). What is significant and clearly discernible from the statement of the witness is that he admitted that it was Jagdish who first came to the village and divulged that something untoward had happened to the Mahant. 24. PW-5 Babulal, also gave evidence on the same lines as Rupchandra. In cross-examination, Babulal admitted that despite the fact that Jagdish and the Mahant quarrelled with each other, the Mahant did not turn Jagdish out of the Math. The witness also admitted that when they first reached the place of occurrence, no foot marks were visible near the cot of the Mahant. 25. PW-6 Khushal Giri stood as a Panch witness to the Panchnama Lash (Ex.P/4). His evidence is formal in nature. 26. PW-7 Jagmal stood as a Panch witness in the proceedings of collection of suspects' foot moulds which were recorded in memorandum (Ex.P/5). 27. PW-8 Jetharam also stood as a Panch witness in the proceedings of collection of the suspects' foot moulds. In crossexamination, the witness stated that the foot marks were of Madanlal, Kamal Singh and Jagdish. 28. PW-9 Girdhar Singh stood as a Panch witness in the various documents viz. Fard Surathaal Lash (Ex.P/6), Fard Supurdagi Lash (Ex.P/7), site inspection memo (Ex.P/8) and the Fard Panchnama Lash (Ex.P/4). The evidence of this witness is also formal in nature. Singnificantly, in cross-examination, the witness admitted that no one other than the Mahant, stayed in the Math during night time. 29. Fard Surathaal Lash (Ex.P/6), Fard Supurdagi Lash (Ex.P/7), site inspection memo (Ex.P/8) and the Fard Panchnama Lash (Ex.P/4). The evidence of this witness is also formal in nature. Singnificantly, in cross-examination, the witness admitted that no one other than the Mahant, stayed in the Math during night time. 29. PW-10 Chandan Giri was posted as a Constable at the S.P. Office, Barmer who took the photographs of the place of occurrence with his digital camera. The evidence of this witness is formal in nature. 30. PW-11 Khetaram was posted in the MOB Branch of the S.P. Office, Barmer. He gave evidence regarding preparation of the foot print moulds from the place of occurrence and proved the memorandum (Ex.P/5). He also proved the proceedings whereby, the suspects' foot print moulds were collected and the memorandum thereof (Ex.P/28) was prepared. In crossexamination, the witness was put a pertinent question that the foot moulds which he prepared were not available in the Court. The witness admitted this fact. The witness also admitted in his cross-examination that the FSL report of the foot moulds was not available on record. 31. PW-12 Baburam stated that Jagdish was married. He used to clean the Math and also serve the Mahant. The witness was declared hostile as he did not support the prosecution case. 32. PW-13 Lunaram also did not support the prosecution case and was declared hostile. 33. PW-14 Banwari Lal, Constable proved the arrest memos of the three accused and also proved the seizure memos (Ex.P/33, Ex.P/34 and Ex.P/35) whereby, the foot wear worn by the accused at the time of their arrest were taken into possession by the I.O. 34. PW-15 Khema Ram, who was posted as S.I. at the Police Station Sadar, Barmer, conducted formal investigation. 35. PW-16 Mangal Singh deposed that Purannathji was the Mahant of the Jarnanath Math, Bhadkha. Jagdish used to serve him. Two years earlier, he, Purannathji, Gula Khan, Laxman and Jagdish prepared meat and consumed liquor in the Math. After consuming liquor, Purannathji and Jagdish quarrelled with each other. Jagdish hurled an insinuation that he would take revenge and would kill the Mahant within 15-20 days. Thereafter, Jagdish's two brothers came and took him away. The Mahant used to tell the villagers that Jagdish was in a habit of stealing his money. After consuming liquor, Purannathji and Jagdish quarrelled with each other. Jagdish hurled an insinuation that he would take revenge and would kill the Mahant within 15-20 days. Thereafter, Jagdish's two brothers came and took him away. The Mahant used to tell the villagers that Jagdish was in a habit of stealing his money. In cross-examination, the witness stated that he would also go to the Math for offering his services every second or third day and whenever he went, a liquor and meat party would be organised in the Math. He also admitted that in his presence, the Mahant and Jagdish quarrelled with each other on a number of occasions and that the Mahant also used to consume liquor and meat. No report was ever lodged regarding the quarrels which took place between the Mahant and Jagdish. The Mahant did not file any report regarding the alleged theft of money committed by Jagdish. 36. PW-17 Gulam, gave evidence akin to what was stated by PW-16 Mangal Singh. In cross-examination, the witness admitted that Purnnathji was in a habit of consuming liquor, meat and also indulged in enjoying female company (ehV] 'kjkc vkSj 'kckc). Whenever Purnnathji and Jagdish consumed liquor, they would quarrel with each other but morning after, they would reconcile and behave normally. On the night when the Mahant and Jagdish quarrelled, the liquor had been brought by Jagdish and the payment was made by the Mahant. 37. PW-18 Pappu Ram @ Jugal Kishore did not support the prosecution case and was declared hostile. He had been examined during investigation to prove that Hema Ram brought the stolen Kada to him. He resiled from his police statement (Ex.P/36) and denied the same completely. Thus, from the statement of this witness, no incriminating inference can be drawn against the accused Hema Ram. 38. PW-19 Nathuram was the Tehsildar in whose presence, the SHO prepared the specimen foot mould impressions of the three accused. The Tehsildar proved the memorandum (Ex.P/28). However, the admission made by the Tehsildar in crossexamination, completely demolishes the proceedings undertaken by the I.O. while preparing these foot mould impressions. The Tehsildar admitted that when he reached the police station, he was told that the foot moulds had already been prepared. The accused were not made to give their foot moulds in his presence. The foot mould impressions were not sealed. The Tehsildar admitted that when he reached the police station, he was told that the foot moulds had already been prepared. The accused were not made to give their foot moulds in his presence. The foot mould impressions were not sealed. From the evidence of this witness, it becomes clear that the proceedings whereby, the foot mould impressions of the accused were collected, are totally farcical as the same were never held in presence of the Tehsildar, as portrayed in the memorandum (Ex.P/28). 39. PW-20 Sagar too did not support the prosecution story and denied that a person named Nandkishore approached him for melting the gold Kada in question or that he prepared two melted gold pieces out of such Kada. He resiled from his investigational statement (Ex.P/37) and was declared hostile. 40. It may be noted here that Nand Kishore was neither arraigned as an accused nor was he examined as a witness of the prosecution. 41. PW-21 Natharam was the Sarpanch of the village Bhadkha at the relevant point of time. He lodged the FIR (Ex.P/1). He too gave evidence on the same lines as the other witnesses of the village referred to supra alleging that after consuming liquor and meat, Jagdish had hurled an insinuation that he would kill the Mahant. 42. PW-22 Kamal Singh, who was running a sweet shop behind the Jarnanathji Math, stated that Purnnathji came to his shop in the evening at 8-9 O' Clock. He dropped Purnnathji back at the Math; he went to sleep on a cot and then the witness returned to his shop. In the morning, he heard that Purnnathji had passed away. 43. PW-23 Sanjay Kumar gave evidence stating that Hema Ram and Raju used to stay as tenants in the house of Jugal Kishore Maheshwari in Jagdamba Colony, Basni Second Phase, Jodhpur. Nothing significant can be extricated from the evidence of this witness so as to incriminate the accused. 44. PW-24 Hanumana Ram was posted Maalkhana Incharge at the Police Station Sadar Barmer. He stated in his evidence that the Circle Inspector deposited three foot moulds with him on 18.08.2009. Another set of three foot moulds were deposited by the I.O. in the Maalkhana on 23.08.2009. On 23.08.2009, three pairs of foot wear of the accused, were deposited by the SHO with the Maalkhana Incharge. These articles were forwarded to the FSL with Pappuram Constable. Another set of three foot moulds were deposited by the I.O. in the Maalkhana on 23.08.2009. On 23.08.2009, three pairs of foot wear of the accused, were deposited by the SHO with the Maalkhana Incharge. These articles were forwarded to the FSL with Pappuram Constable. He also gave evidence regarding deposition of the melted gold pieces in the Maalkhana. In crossexamination, the witness admitted that the foot moulds and the pairs of foot wear deposited in the Maalkhana were not available in the Court. The witness feigned ignorance as to whether the foot moulds deposited with him were sealed or not. 45. PW-25 Premaram was posted as a Head Constable in the S.P. Office, Barmer. He prepared the relevant documents for forwarding of the Maalkhana articles to the FSL. 46. PW-26 Pappuram, who was posted as Constable at Police Station Sadar, Barmer, stated that he carried the articles provided to him by Maalkhana Incharge Hadmana Ram from the Police Station Sadar Barmer on 31.08.209 and deposited the same at the FSL, Jaipur on 01.09.2009. 47. PW-27 Kaluram stood as a motbir in the proceedings of recovery of the gold piece weighing 210.60 gms. from the accused Hema Ram and the gold piece weighing 97.60 gms. from the accused Raju. He attested the seizure memos (Ex.P/42) and (Ex.P/45). 48. PW-28 Madanlal gave evidence akin to what was stated by Rupchandra, Babulal and Kamal Singh. Even the facts elicited during his cross-examination are identical. 49. PW-29 Lachharam was engaged as a driver on the vehicle of the Math. He stated that a goat was sacrificed in the Math on a particular evening when he, Gula Khan, Mangal Singh, Purnnathji and Jagdish were all present in the Math. All consumed liquor and had meat as well. In the night, Jagdish and the Mahant quarrelled with each other. Jagdish's two brothers came and took him away. Purnnathji used to keep his money in a cloth sachet which was tied to his abdomen. From the evidence of this witness, nothing significant can be elicited which would tend to incriminate the accused. 50. PW-30 Ramesh Kumar was posted as the SHO, Police Station Sadar Barmer at the relevant point of time. He received the FIR, conducted the relevant steps of investigation, effected recoveries and filed a charge-sheet against the accused. 51. From the evidence of this witness, nothing significant can be elicited which would tend to incriminate the accused. 50. PW-30 Ramesh Kumar was posted as the SHO, Police Station Sadar Barmer at the relevant point of time. He received the FIR, conducted the relevant steps of investigation, effected recoveries and filed a charge-sheet against the accused. 51. The learned Trial Judge, after appreciating the evidence available on the record, held the recoveries of the gold pieces effected from the accused Hema Ram and Raju and the cash recovered from the accused Jagdish to be incriminating. Motive of robbery was imputed to the three accused persons. The memo of pointing out of the place of occurrence by the accused was also considered to be incriminating in nature. The foot print impression comparison FSL report was held to be reliable and accordingly, the accused appellants were convicted and sentenced as above. 52. First, we proceed to deal with the finding of the learned trial court regarding the foot print impressions. At the outset, we may state that the prosecution has failed to lead cogent evidence so as to prove that the procedure of collecting the foot print impressions was faithful or bears any sanctity whatsoever. The Tehsildar (PW19) Shri Nathuram admitted in his evidence that he was made to sign the memorandum (Ex.P/28) without the procedure of collecting the foot moulds being undertaken in his presence. On a perusal of the Site Inspection Plan (Ex.P/8), it is clear that the suspects' foot impressions are noted at points X1, X2 and X3 which are just adjacent to the cot on which the dead body of Mahant was lying. Manifestly, as the villagers had collected at the place of occurrence well before the police arrived and as, even the dead body had been carefully checked by such villagers, the possibility of the foot prints of the suspects had been smudged in the foot prints of the villagers cannot be ruled out. On going through the memorandum (Ex.P/5) by which, these foot prints were lifted by Khetaram (PW-11), it is clear that foot print moulds were not sealed after they were prepared. There is no evidence on the record of the case to show that the foot print impressions prepared by the I.O. were ever kept in a sealed condition. No witness of the prosecution claimed that the impressions were sealed after collection. There is no evidence on the record of the case to show that the foot print impressions prepared by the I.O. were ever kept in a sealed condition. No witness of the prosecution claimed that the impressions were sealed after collection. On going through the entire record and the impugned judgment, it is clear that FSL report issued after comparison of the specimen foot moulds and the foot print impressions of the accused, was neither exhibited on record nor was the same put to the accused when they were questioned under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Though the FSL report is available on record and this Court, even while examining the matter in appeal, can put a question in reference thereto to the accused but, having considered the fact that the procedure of collection of samples is clearly tainted and unreliable, we refrain from doing so at this belated stage and hold that the finding recorded by the learned Trial Judge in the impugned judgment that the foot print impressions report is incriminating in nature, is absolutely laconic and unsustainable. 53. So far as the circumstance of pointing out of the place of incident by the accused to the I.O. is concerned (which was treated to be an incriminating one by the trial court), suffice it to say that the place of incident was already known to the I.O. well before the accused were arrested and hence, the pointing out thereof by the accused to the I.O. cannot be considered to be an incriminating circumstance because a place already known to the I.O. could not have been rediscovered. 54. As is evident from the statements of the material witnesses being the villagers of the village Bhadkha, which have been discussed above, none of them, alleged that the accused Jagdish @ Jagiya used to sleep in the Math and thus, no inference of last seen together can be drawn against him. He was the Sewadar of the Mahant for the last 15 years. The prosecution has tried to lead evidence to show that Jagdish @ Jagiya had threatened the Mahant with dire consequences 15 days before the incident. However, after evaluating the evidence of the witnesses referred to supra, it is clear that the quarrels between the Mahant and the accused appellant Jagdish were routine and used to happen when both were inebriated. The prosecution has tried to lead evidence to show that Jagdish @ Jagiya had threatened the Mahant with dire consequences 15 days before the incident. However, after evaluating the evidence of the witnesses referred to supra, it is clear that the quarrels between the Mahant and the accused appellant Jagdish were routine and used to happen when both were inebriated. Therefore, the threat, if any, given by the accused to the deceased under the influence of liquor cannot be considered serious enough so as to be treated to be incriminating evidence of motive against the accused Jagdish. 55. Once, this part of the prosecution case is excluded from consideration, the only evidence which remains on record against the accused would be in the form of the recoveries. So far as the recovery of cash amount from Jagdish is concerned, suffice it to say that currency notes did not bear any particular identifying marks so as to be linked with the deceased Purannath. Furthermore, even as per the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, Rupchandra (PW-4) and Mangal Singh (PW-16), it is clear that the accused was in a regular habit of stealing the money of the Mahant who used to condone the act casually. Thus, the amount which was recovered from the accused Jagdish @ Jagiya might have been the collection from his earlier forays and it cannot be concluded with any degree of certainty that he removed the sum of Rs.55,000/- from the body of Shri Purnnathji after killing him on the night intervening 17.08.2009 and 18.08.2009. The conduct of Jagdish in approaching Rupchandra, Babulal and Kamal Singh, in the morning of 18.08.2009 and telling them that something untoward had happened with the Mahantji probablise his innocence rather than pointing to his guilt. 56. So far as the recovery of the gold pieces effected from Hema Ram and Raju is concerned, manifestly, the pieces of melted gold are not identifiable. The accused Hema Ram took a specific plea in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. that the police took away the ornaments of the females from his house; melted the same and planted a fake recovery on to him. As per the prosecution case, Nandkishore approached Sagar (PW-20) with the Kada and got the same melted through him. The said Nandkishore was neither arraigned in the case nor was he examined as a witness. As per the prosecution case, Nandkishore approached Sagar (PW-20) with the Kada and got the same melted through him. The said Nandkishore was neither arraigned in the case nor was he examined as a witness. PW-20 Sagar did not support the prosecution story and was declared hostile. Manifestly thus, recovery of the gold pieces made at the instance of the accused Hema Ram and Raju cannot connect them with the murder of the Mahant Purnnathji. In addition thereto, it is apparent that the learned trial court did not frame any charge of theft or robbery against the accused. Therefore also, we are of the view that conviction of the accused appellants for the offence under Section 302 IPC on the basis of flimsy and unreliable prosecution evidence, discussed above, is not justified. The impugned Judgment, apart from being based on conjectures and surmises, is laconic to say the least and cannot be sustained. 57. Since, neither the accused nor any successor of the Mahant staked a claim for the cash amount recovered from the accused Jagdish @ Jagiya or the gold pieces recovered from the accused Raju and Hema Ram @ Hemant Kumar, we hereby direct that the same shall be confiscated in favour of the State Government. 58. As a result of the discussion made hereinabove, the appeals succeed and are hereby allowed. The impugned judgment dated 03.10.2015 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Barmer in Sessions Case No.80/2009 (State Vs. Jagdish @ Jagiya) & Ors.) is hereby quashed and set aside. The accused-appellants are acquitted of the charges under Sections 302/34 and 457 IPC. The appellant Jagdish @ Jagiya is in custody and shall be released from prison forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. Appellants Hema Ram @ Hemant Kumar and Raju are already on bail. Their bail bonds stand discharged. 59. However, keeping in view the provisions of Section 437-A Cr.P.C., each of the acquitted appellant shall furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs.40,000/- and a surety bond in the like amount before the learned Trial Court, which shall be effective for a period of six months to the effect that in the event of filing of a Special Leave Petition against the present judgment on receipt of notice thereof, they shall appear before the Supreme Court.