ORDER : Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J. 1. Heard Sri Ramesh Kumar Pandey, for the appellant and Sri Nafees Ahmad, A.G.A., for State of U.P. 2. Krishanpal son of Satyapal has filed Criminal Appeal No. 3127 of 1982 and Satyapal, Krishanpal son of Rukan Singh and Devendra @ Avendra had filed Criminal Appeal No. 3153 of 1982, from their conviction and sentence passed by Second Additional Session's Judge, Ghaziabad, dated 25.11.1982, in S.T. No. 131 of 1980, State Vs. Satpal and others, [arising out of Case Crime No. 31 of 1980, under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the IPC), P.S. Murad Nagar, district Ghaziabad], convicting them under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and awarding sentence of life imprisonment. These appeals were arising out of same judgment as such these were consolidated. Under some confusion Criminal Appeal No. 3127 of 1982 was dismissed as abated by order dated 21.04.2017. Criminal Appeal No. 3153 of 1982 was allowed by judgment dated 28.05.2018, on merit. On the application of Krishanpal son of Satyapal, the order dated 21.04.2017 was recalled on 14.09.2018 and Criminal Appeal No. 3127 of 1982 was restored as such it was again listed for hearing before this Bench. 3. On the complaint (Ex-Ka-1) of Aman Singh (P.W.-1), FIR (Ex-Ka-11) of Case Crime No. 31 of 1980 was registered on 28.01.1980 at 6:30 PM, under Section 302 IPC, at P.S. Murad Nagar, district Ghaziabad, against Satyapal, Krishanpal son of Rukan Singh and Devendra @ Avendra and Krishanpal son of Satyapal, by Head Moharrir Ram Veer. It has been stated in the FIR that on 28.01.1980, the informant and his son Satvir Singh had gone to Murad Nagar for purchasing diesel. As diesel was not available at Murad Nagar, as such they returned from there. His nephew Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2) met them at the bus stand Murad Nagar. The informant asked Satvir Singh (the deceased) to go to the village on the cycle of Jagvir Singh, as he had to take medicine. As such Jagvir Singh and Satvir Singh proceeded towards village Noorpur on one cycle. After purchasing medicine, the informant also proceeded towards his village. Arjun Singh (P.W.-3) and Kalu met to the informant at Moradabad Padav and they were also returning towards village Noorpur as such all of them proceeded together, on their separate cycles. As such Jagvir Singh and Satvir Singh proceeded towards village Noorpur on one cycle. After purchasing medicine, the informant also proceeded towards his village. Arjun Singh (P.W.-3) and Kalu met to the informant at Moradabad Padav and they were also returning towards village Noorpur as such all of them proceeded together, on their separate cycles. When they reached near Eidgah on Jalalabad road at about 5:00 PM, they saw that the accused were stabbing Satvir Singh through knives, felling him on earth. They as well as other passerby challenged the accused and rushed towards them, then the accused ran away from the spot. On reaching there, they found Satvir Singh as dead. On their arrival, Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2) came out from the field of sugarcane, where he was hiding, due to fear. They found that Satvir Singh was sustaining several knife injuries and his body was drenched with blood. In the village of the informant, play of Ramlila was going on from last 6 days. 2-3 days before the incident, some fight had taken place between the accused and the deceased as the accused were creating hindrance. At that time, the villagers had pacified the accused but due to that incident, they had committed murder of Satvir Singh. 4. After registration of FIR, SHO Onkar Singh (P.W.-6) started investigation. He copied the check FIR and G.D. entry in case diary and recorded statements of HM Ram Veer and Aman Singh. He along with other police personnel came on the spot. On his direction, SI Ram Charan Lal Sharma (P.W.-5) conducted Inquest (Ex-Ka-3) of the dead body. He prepared photo lash, police paper and letters to authorities for conducting postmortem of the deceased. He dispatched the dead body for postmortem. Onkar Singh (P.W.-6) took in possession blood stained earth and plain earth from the spot and prepared its recovery memo (Ex-Ka-9). On the spot, he found one hockey and one pair sleeper and prepared its recovery memo (Ex-Ka-10). He prepared site-plan (Ex-Ka-13). After investigation, he submitted charge sheet (Ex-Ka-14) against the accused, on which cognizance was taken. 5. Dr. Onkar Singh (P.W.-6) took in possession blood stained earth and plain earth from the spot and prepared its recovery memo (Ex-Ka-9). On the spot, he found one hockey and one pair sleeper and prepared its recovery memo (Ex-Ka-10). He prepared site-plan (Ex-Ka-13). After investigation, he submitted charge sheet (Ex-Ka-14) against the accused, on which cognizance was taken. 5. Dr. S.B. Mathur, Medical Officer, District Hospital Ghaziabad conducted autopsy of the dead body on 29.01.1980 at 1:45 PM and prepared postmortem report (Ex-Ka-2) in which following ante-mortem injuries were noted:- (1) Lacerated wound 'Y' shape 6 cm x 1 cm, 2-1/2 cm x 1/2 cm x bone deep on the top of right side of head just right middle line. (2) Lacerated wound 5 cm x 1 cm x bone deep in left side head 5 cm above the middle left eye brow. (3) Abrasion 1 cm x 1 cm on fore-head 1 cm below injury No. 2 (4) Punctured wound 2 cm x 1/2 cm x 3 cm deep on right side chin 1 cm below the outer edge of mouth-direction-left to right and above downwards and oblique. (5) Punctured wound 1 cm x 1/2 cm x 2 cm deep on the upper part of neck right side 3 cm left to angle of right lower jaw. Above down and from left to right. (6) Punctured wound 2 cm x 1/2 cm x 3 cm deep on right side neck 3 cm below injury No. 5 from left to right and above downwards. (7) Punctured wound 2-1/2 cm x 1 cm x chest cavity deep on right side chest 6 cm from right nipple at 4 o'clock position just by side of sternum from front behind. (8) Punctured wound 2 cm x 1/2 cm x chest cavity deep on left side chest 5 cm from left nipple at 8 o'clock position right left and from front to behind. (9) Punctured wound 2 cm x 1/2 cm x chest cavity deep on left side chest 5 cm below injury (8) above down and front behind oblique and left to right. (10) Punctured wound 2-1/2 cm x 1/2 cm x chest cavity deep on left side chest 3 cm below auxiliary line front behind and from left to right. (9) Punctured wound 2 cm x 1/2 cm x chest cavity deep on left side chest 5 cm below injury (8) above down and front behind oblique and left to right. (10) Punctured wound 2-1/2 cm x 1/2 cm x chest cavity deep on left side chest 3 cm below auxiliary line front behind and from left to right. (11) Punctured wound 2 cm x 1 cm x 4 cm deep on left side chest 10 cm below injury No. 10 from behind along with the eye. (12) Punctured wound 5 cm x 3 cm x abdominal cavity deep on left side abdomen 8 cm below injury No. 11. A loop of small intestine outer omentum coming out from the wound. Small intestine is punctured at one place-Direction-Above downwards and left to right. (13) Incised wound 1 cm x 1/5 cm x skin deep over the left index finger on the crease between middle and last..... (14) Abrasion 1-1/2 cm x 1 cm on the back of left forearm 2 cm below the lip of left elbow joint. (15) Contusion 7 cm x 3 cm on the left thigh on the junction of middle and lower 1/3 on outer side. (16) Multiple abrasion in an area of 11 cm x 5 cm over front of left knee and upper part of left leg. (17) Lacerated wound 1-1/2 cm x 1/2 cm x bone deep on the outer aspect of left leg 4 cm above the outer malleolus....... (18) Multiple abrasion in an area of 4 cm x 3 cm on the front of right knee lower part. (19) Multiple abrasion in an area of 6 cm x 4 cm on the front of left ankle and foot. (20) Incised wound 5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep on the thin Emmince of right palm. (21) Contusion 8 cm x 2 cm on the top of right shoulder and outer side of right arm upper part. (22) Punctured wound 2-1/2 cm x 1 cm x 4 cm deep on the upper part of right scapular region 5 cm below the Acrimo clavical joint in the back side-above downwards. (23) Punctured wound 1 cm x 1/2 cm x 1-1/2 cm deep on right side back 11 cm below the axilla in post axillary line-above-downwards. (22) Punctured wound 2-1/2 cm x 1 cm x 4 cm deep on the upper part of right scapular region 5 cm below the Acrimo clavical joint in the back side-above downwards. (23) Punctured wound 1 cm x 1/2 cm x 1-1/2 cm deep on right side back 11 cm below the axilla in post axillary line-above-downwards. (24) Punctured wound 2 cm x 1 cm x 5 cm deep just right to the vertebral column at the level of angle of scapula from behind forward and above downwards. (25) Punctured wound 2 cm x 1/2 cm x 2-1/2 cm in the midline just below the injury No. 24 behind front. (26) Punctured wound 1-1/2 cm x 1/2 cm x 2 cm deep - 2 cm below injury No. 25. (27) Punctured wound 2-1/2 cm x 1 cm x 3 cm deep on right side back 12 cm below injury No. (26) Above downwards. Right left and behind front. (28) Punctured wound 3 cm x 1 cm x 4 cm deep on left scapular region middle part on right-left and above downwards. (29) Abrasion 1-1/2 cm x 1 cm outer left scapular region 5 cm above injury No. 28. (30) Punctured wound 2-1/2 cm x 1 cm x 5 cm deep outer left side back inferior angle of scapula 5 cm left to back bone. (31) Punctured wound 1 cm x 1/5 cm x 1 cm deep on the left side back 13 cm below injury No. 28. Margins of all punctured wounds were clean cut. The medical officer recovered a diesel supply card from the pocket of the deceased and the same was sent in a sealed packet along with the blood stained clothes of a deceased to the Superintendent of Police. Internal examination revealed ecchymosis in an area of 10 cm x 10 cm on the right side head and in an area of 8 cm x 8 cm on left side forehead. An ecchymosis was also found around the wounds on the chest cavity. Both the lungs, pericardium and heart were found punctured. According to Dr. Mathur, death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of the antemortem injuries. 6. On committal, the case was registered as S.T. No. 131 of 1980. Additional Sessions Judge framed charges on 01.09.1981 against the accused. The accused pleaded "not guilty" and claimed trial. Both the lungs, pericardium and heart were found punctured. According to Dr. Mathur, death was due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of the antemortem injuries. 6. On committal, the case was registered as S.T. No. 131 of 1980. Additional Sessions Judge framed charges on 01.09.1981 against the accused. The accused pleaded "not guilty" and claimed trial. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined Aman Singh (P.W.-1), the informant and father of the deceased, Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2), cousin of the deceased and an eye witness, Arjun Singh (P.W.-3), an eye witness, Anandvir (P.W.-4), an eye witness, SI Ram Charan Lal Sharma (P.W.-5), to prove Inquest of the deceased, SI Onkar Singh (P.W.-6), Investigating Officer and filed affidavit of Constable Samod Singh (P.W.-7) to prove check FIR. 7. After completion of evidence of the prosecution, all incriminatory facts and materials were put to the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. They denied the facts and materials and stated that they were falsely implicated. The accused did not adduce any evidence in their defence. 8. After hearing the parties, Additional Sessions Judge, by the impugned judgment, held that this was a day light murder, which was witnessed by Aman Singh, Jagvir Singh, Arjun Singh and Anandvir Singh (P.Ws.-1 to 4), who have proved the charges against the accused. On these findings, he convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentence as mentioned above. Hence, this appeal has been filed. 9. We have considered the arguments of the counsel for the parties and examined the record. According to the prosecution, Satvir Singh son of Aman Singh was murdered by the accused, causing knife injuries on 28.01.1980 at 5:00 PM on roadside, near Eidgah of village Jalalabad. Jalalabad was at a distance of 2 KM from village Noorpur, which was native village of the deceased and at a distance of 3 KM from Murad Nagar, where the deceased had gone to purchase diesel but he could not get diesel and was returning on the cycle with Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2). According to Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2), when the accused dragged Satvir Singh, he ran away from that place and hide in the sugarcane field by the side of the road due to fear. Aman Singh (P.W.-1) is the father of the deceased and Arjun Singh (P.W.-3) is resident of village Noorpur. According to Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2), when the accused dragged Satvir Singh, he ran away from that place and hide in the sugarcane field by the side of the road due to fear. Aman Singh (P.W.-1) is the father of the deceased and Arjun Singh (P.W.-3) is resident of village Noorpur. They claim that they were also returning from Murad Nagar on their cycles, along with one Kalu of village Noorpur, when they reached near the place of occurrence, they found that the accused were causing knife injury to Satvir Singh and on their challenge, they fled away from the spot. Anandvir Singh (P.W.-4) is resident of Jalalabad and claims to be an eye witness. The counsel for the appellant did not challenge the place of occurrence but challenged the presence of the witnesses on the spot and argued that they were falsely implicated due to suspicion of previous incident, as alleged. 10. Aman Singh (P.W.-1) has stated that on 28.01.1980, he and his son Satvir Singh had gone to Murad Nagar for purchasing diesel on the cycle. As diesel was not available at Murad Nagar, as such they returned towards his village. His nephew Jagvir Singh met to them at the bus stand Murad Nagar. The informant asked Satvir to go to the village on his cycle. He went to take medicine on the cycle. As such Jagvir Singh and Satvir Singh started to return to village Noorpur on one cycle. After purchasing medicine, he also returned to his village on his cycle within five minutes. Arjun Singh and Kallu met him at Moradabad Padav. They were also returning to village Noorpur as such all of them started journey together, on their separate cycles. When they reached near Eidgah of village Jalalabad at about 5:00 PM, they saw that the accused were stabbing Satvir through knives. They challenged the accused and rushed towards them, then the accused ran away from the spot. At that time, Anandvir also came on the spot. On reaching there, they found Satvir was drenched with blood and had died. Jagvir Singh came out from the field of sugarcane, where he was hiding, due to fear. Jagvir Singh informed that when they were returning, Satvir was ridding the cycle and he was sitting on its carrier. At that time, Anandvir also came on the spot. On reaching there, they found Satvir was drenched with blood and had died. Jagvir Singh came out from the field of sugarcane, where he was hiding, due to fear. Jagvir Singh informed that when they were returning, Satvir was ridding the cycle and he was sitting on its carrier. As soon as they reached at the place of occurrence, the accused came out from sugarcane field and attacked on the cycle through hockey, due to which they fell down. The accused began to assault Satvir and he entered the sugarcane field due to fear. In the village of the informant, play of Ramlila was going on from last 6 days. 2-3 days before the incident, some altercation had taken place between the accused and the deceased as the accused were misbehaving with the ladies. At that time due to intervention of the villagers, the accused were pacified but due to that incident, they murdered Satvir. 11. Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2) stated that on the date of incident, he had gone to Ghaziabad at 3:30 PM, parking his cycle at Murad Nagar bus stand. When he came back at Murad Nagar bus stand, while returning for his village, his uncle Aman Singh and cousin Satvir met him. Aman Singh took his cycle and asked him to go the village on the cycle of Satvir as he had to purchase medicine. They started returning towards his village. He was riding the cycle and Satvir was sitting on its carrier. As soon as they reached at the place of occurrence, the accused came out from sugarcane field and Satpal attacked on his cycle through hockey stick, due to which they fell down. The accused began to assault Satvir through knife and he entered the sugarcane field due to fear and was watching the incident from that place. On hearing the noise of his uncle, he came out from sugarcane field. The accused persons were seen fleeing away towards south. On the dictation of Aman Singh, he scribed the complaint. 12. Arjun Singh (P.W.-3) has stated that on the date of incident, he and Kalu were returning to his village on their cycles. Aman singh met them at Moradabad Padav and accompanied them. When they reached near Eidgah of village Jalalabad on road, they saw that the accused were stabbing one man through knives. 12. Arjun Singh (P.W.-3) has stated that on the date of incident, he and Kalu were returning to his village on their cycles. Aman singh met them at Moradabad Padav and accompanied them. When they reached near Eidgah of village Jalalabad on road, they saw that the accused were stabbing one man through knives. They shouted and rushed towards them, then they found that the accused, armed with knife, were stabbing Satvir son of Aman Singh and Satvir had died. The accused ran away from there, on their coming. At that time, Anandvir and other residents of Jalalabad also came on the spot. On hearing their noise, Jagvir Singh came out from the field of sugarcane, where he had hidden, due to fear. Jagvir Singh disclosed them about the incident. 13. Anandvir (P.W.-4) has stated that on the date of incident, he was returning from his chak to the village at about 5:00 PM, he had seen that Aman Singh, Arjun Singh and Kallu were going towards Jalalabad on their cycles. As soon as he reached at the turn, he found that four persons were stabbing a man through knife. He had seen the incident from a distance of about 30 yards. He stated that Aman Singh and other villagers of Noorpur were known to him as they used to sell their sugarcane at the same purchase center. He named the accused Kishanpal, Satpal and Devendra @ Avendra. In his presence, Jagvir Singh came out from sugarcane field. He stayed at the place of incident for 20 minutes. 14. Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2) scribed the complaint (Ex-Ka-1) on the dictation of Aman Singh (P.W.-1). In the complaint (Ex-Ka-1), he has not mentioned that the accused first attacked upon the cycle through hockey, on which Satvir (the deceased) and Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2) were going. In the complaint (Ex-Ka-1), the accused were shown as armed with knife and stabbed the deceased through knife. Arjun Singh (P.W.-3) has specifically denied that any of the accused was armed with hockey. It appears that when in postmortem report (Ex-Ka-2), Injury Nos. 1, 2 and 17 were found as lacerated wound, Injury Nos. 15 and 21 were found as the contusion and Injury Nos. 3, 14, 16, 18, 19 and 29 were found as abrasion then the weapon hockey was introduced at later stage, which was a material improvement. It appears that when in postmortem report (Ex-Ka-2), Injury Nos. 1, 2 and 17 were found as lacerated wound, Injury Nos. 15 and 21 were found as the contusion and Injury Nos. 3, 14, 16, 18, 19 and 29 were found as abrasion then the weapon hockey was introduced at later stage, which was a material improvement. The witnesses have not stated about the use of hockey for assaulting the deceased, except that the accused got the cycle turn down using hockey blow. On the body of the deceased five injuries of blunt object were found. There is no explanation of these injuries in the statements of the witnesses. Onkar Singh (P.W.-6), the Investigating Officer specifically denied that any of the witness had informed him that the cycle of the deceased was turned down by hockey blow. 15. According to the witnesses, Satvir (the deceased) and Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2) were returning to their village Noorpur on one cycle. Investigating Officer has not prepared any recovery memo of cycle of Satvir Singh (the deceased) and Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2). Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2) stated that the accused first attacked upon their cycle and got it fell down. Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2) was riding the cycle but he did not receive any injury. 16. Similarly in FIR and statements of witnesses as recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. by Investigating Officer, presence of Anandvir (P.W.-4) on the spot has not been shown. Anandvir (P.W.-4) has been introduced at the later stage, which shows his presence doubtful. Thus the prosecution case, as set up has not been proved. 17. Aman Singh (P.W.-1) is the father and Jagvir Singh (P.W.-2) is cousin and Arjun Singh (P.W.-3) is the friend of the deceased. They are residents of village Noorpur which was at a distance of 2 KM away from the place of incident. In usual course, their presence at the place of occurrence was not probable. They are close relations of the deceased. In view of the discrepancies in their statements as mentioned above, their presence on the spot was doubtful. Similarly presence of Anandvir (P.W.-4) on the spot is also doubtful, inasmuch as if he would have been present on the spot, then there could be no reason for not mentioning his name as the witness in FIR. The appellant is entitled to benefits of doubt. 18. Similarly presence of Anandvir (P.W.-4) on the spot is also doubtful, inasmuch as if he would have been present on the spot, then there could be no reason for not mentioning his name as the witness in FIR. The appellant is entitled to benefits of doubt. 18. Supreme Court in Satbir v. Surat Singh, (1997) 4 SCC 192 , Harjinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2004) 11 SCC 253 , Acharaparambath Pradeepan v. State of Kerala, (2006) 13 SCC 643, Sarvesh Narain Shukla v. Daroga Singh, (2007) 13 SCC 360 ) and Jarnail Singh v. State of Punjab, (2009) 9 SCC 719 has held that the evidence of a chance witness requires a very cautious and close scrutiny and a chance witness must adequately explain his presence at the place of occurrence. In Shankarlal v. State of Rajasthan, (2004) 10 SCC 632 has held that deposition of a chance witness whose presence at the place of incident remains doubtful should be discarded. 19. In result, the appeal succeeds and is allowed. Conviction and sentence of Krishanpal son of Satya Pal Jat (the appellant) passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad, dated 25.11.1982, in S.T. No. 131 of 1980, State Vs. Satpal and others, under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, P.S. Murad Nagar, district Ghaziabad, is set aside. The appellant is set free at his liberty. His bail bonds are canceled and sureties are discharged. Office shall communicate this order to the Court concerned forthwith to take consequential action under intimation to this Court. Original records be also returned.