JUDGMENT : Anil Kumar-IX, J. 1. Heard Sri Mahesh Chandra Joshi, A.G.A. 1st, for State Of U.P. and Sri Prabhat Kumar Srivastava, for the informant and Sri Vivek Kumar Singh and Sri Mayank Yadav, for the accused-respondents. 2. State of U.P. has filed Government Appeal No. 8229 of 2010 and Baljor Singh (the informant) has filed Criminal Appeal U/S 372 No. 20 of 2016, from judgment of Additional Session's Judge/Fast Track Court No. 4, Bagpat, dated 17.09.2010, in S.T. No. 273 of 2000, State Vs Ilam Singh and others, [arising out of Case Crime No. 142 of 1999, under Section 302, 307, 120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as the IPC), P.S. Khekada, district Bagpat], acquitting the accused-respondents. 3. On the complaint (Ex-Ka-1) of Baljor Singh (PW-1), FIR (Ex-Ka-2) of Case Crime No. 142 of 1999 was registered on 05.05.1999 at 00:30 hours, under Section 302, 307, 120-B IPC, at P.S. Khekada, district Bagpat, against Ilam Singh, Vikesh, Smt. Savita and two unknown persons, by Head Moharrir Roshan Lal (PW-4). It has been stated in the FIR that in the night of 04/05.05.1999, the informant, his son Sans Pal, his grand son Ankit and two relatives, namely Mahavir son of Bas, resident of village Khampur and Raj Singh son of Dalel Singh, resident of village Sadarpur, were sleeping at his tube-well. All of a sudden, he awoke at about 11:30 PM, on the sound of firing and shriekes, then he found that four persons had besieged his son Sans Pal. In the meantime, one of them shot fire from close range upon Sans Pal, who was lying on the earth. Thereafter, they fled away towards north. While running, they also made another fire towards sugarcane field. He had fully recognized the accused in the light of torch, while running. Out of them one was Ilam Singh, father-in-law of his younger son Ravindra and other was Vikesh, brother-in-law of Ravindra, residents of village Titauli, PS Shamli, district Muzaffar Nagar. He saw the remaining two accused in the light of torch and he can recognize them on coming before him. He immediately came near his son Sans Pal but he had died. The bullets also hit to his relatives Mahavir and Raj Singh and caused injury to them. He saw the remaining two accused in the light of torch and he can recognize them on coming before him. He immediately came near his son Sans Pal but he had died. The bullets also hit to his relatives Mahavir and Raj Singh and caused injury to them. This murder was got done by Smt. Savita, wife of his younger son Ravindra, due to enmity in relation to partition of the land, conspiring with her father and others. Dead body of his son was lying on the spot. The injured were brought to the police station with the help of the villagers. After lodging his report, legal action be taken. 4. After registration of FIR, SHO Satya Pratap Singh (PW-7) started investigation. He copied the check FIR and G.D. entry in case diary and recorded statements of HM Roshan Lal. He came on the spot in night and recorded statements of Baljor Singh and Ankit. On his direction SI Chatar Singh conducted Inquest (Ex-Ka-8) of dead body, on 05.05.1999 between 1:10 AM to 2:45 AM. He prepared photo lash, challan lash, letters to the authorities for conducting postmortem of the dead body (Ex-Ka-9 to Ka12) and dispatched the dead body through Constables Rohtash Kumar and Shyam Kumar, for postmortem. On the pointing out of the informant, he prepared site-plan (Ex-Ka-5) in morning. He took into possession the torch of the informant and prepared its recovery memo (Ex-Ka-6). He took blood stained as well as plain earth, tikali and an empty cartridge of 12 bore from the spot and prepared its recovery memo (Ex-Ka-7). He recorded statements of scribe of the complaint and other witnesses of the spot. On 06.05.1999, he copied postmortem report in case diary and recorded statements of injured Raj Singh and one Neetu. On 12.05.1999, he recorded statement of Kamlesh. On 18.05.1999, Investigation was transferred to CB CID. 5. Inspector Ajay Pal Singh (PW-7) started investigation in July 1999. He recorded statements of Baljor Singh, Ratan Singh, Narendra @ Pintu, Smt. Kamlesh, Km. Reena, Bhule Singh, Sukhpal Singh, Niranjan, Yaseen, Sanjay, Pawan and Ravindra. He made spot inspection and recorded statement of SI Satya Pratap Singh. On 31.08.1999, he recorded statements of Raj Singh and Mahavir Singh. He arrested the accused on 27.11.1999 and recorded statements of Ilam Singh, Vikesh, Ravindra and Smt. Savita. Reena, Bhule Singh, Sukhpal Singh, Niranjan, Yaseen, Sanjay, Pawan and Ravindra. He made spot inspection and recorded statement of SI Satya Pratap Singh. On 31.08.1999, he recorded statements of Raj Singh and Mahavir Singh. He arrested the accused on 27.11.1999 and recorded statements of Ilam Singh, Vikesh, Ravindra and Smt. Savita. After investigation, he submitted charge sheet (Ex-Ka-13) on 02.02.2000, against Ilam Singh, Vikesh Kumar and Ravindra, on which cognizance was taken. Smt. Savita wife of Ravindra was exonerated. 6. Dr. J.K. Jain (PW-6) conducted autopsy of the deceased on 05.05.1999 at 4:00 PM and prepared Postmortem Report (Ex-Ka-4), in which following ante-mortem injuries were noted:- (i) Multiple pellet injuries (gun shot) of entry in an area of 28 cm x 17 cm on front of the shoulder and chest. No blackening and tattooing seen, each measuring 0.5 cm x0.4 cm. 23 pellets recovered from shaft tissues of chest wall, sealed and sent to S.O. Khekara. (ii) Gun shot wound of entry 3 cm x 0.5 cm x cavity on right side of back, 15 cm below shoulder, blackening in an area 10 cm x 8 cm around injury. A yellow colored metallic bullet recovered from left lung. Sealed and sent to S.O. Khekara. Size of bullet 3 cm x 0.8 cm. (iii) Lacerated wound 1 cm x 1 cm x scalp on right side of head and face. 2 cm in front of right ear. In internal examination, right plura was lacerated; both lungs were lacerated, pericardium and heart and big vessels were lacerated; chest cavity contained about 02 liters of free and clotted blood; stomach and bladder empty. Duration of death were noted as about 3-4 days. Cause of death was noted as “due to shock and hemorrhage due to ante mortem injuries”. 7. Dr. Sunil (PW-9) conducted medical examination of Raj Singh and Mahavir and prepared their Injury Reports (Ex-Ka-14 and Ka-15). On the body of Raj Singh, bullet injuries over left shoulder and left pinna were found. On the body of Mahavir, bullet injuries were found on left side of face and upper part of shoulder. 8. On committal, the case was registered as Sessions Trial No. 273 of 2000. Sessions Judge framed charges on 08.04.2002 against the accused. The accused pleaded “not guilty” and claimed for trial. On the body of Mahavir, bullet injuries were found on left side of face and upper part of shoulder. 8. On committal, the case was registered as Sessions Trial No. 273 of 2000. Sessions Judge framed charges on 08.04.2002 against the accused. The accused pleaded “not guilty” and claimed for trial. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution examined Baljor Singh (PW-1), the informant and an eye witness, Harendra @ Bittoo (PW-2), the son of the deceased, Raj Singh (PW-3), an injured witness, Roshan Lal (PW-4), to prove check FIR, Mahavir (PW-5), an injured witness, Dr. J.K. Jain (PW-6) to prove postmortem report, SI Satya Pratap Singh (PW-7), first Investigating Officer, Inspector Ajay Pal Singh (PW-7), second Investigating Officer, Danvir Singh (PW-8), clerk of Lok Naik Hospital and Dr. Suneel (PW-9) to prove Injury Reports of Raj Singh and Mahavir (Ex-Ka-14 and Ka-15). 9. After completion of evidence of the prosecution, all incriminatory facts and materials were put to the accused under Section 313 CrPC. They denied the facts and materials and stated that they were falsely implicated. Ilam Singh and Vikesh Kumar stated that they were relation of Ravindra. Baljor had dispute with Ravindra, in respect of land. Baljor was taking side of Sans Pal. Ravindra had two bigha excess land. Baljor had purchased the land in which he had given Rs. 80,000/-In order to with held his money he and his son were falsely implicated. Ravindra stated that this was a night incident and no one had seen the assailants. His father had purchased land through sale deed, for which Ilam Singh had given Rs. 80,000/-He and Sans Pal had also spent some money. His father used to take favour of Sans Pal. Wife and children of Sans Pal falsely got lodged the FIR of the incident against them through Baljor, in order to mount pressure upon him. His father transferred half of the land in favour of wife of Sans Pal after this incident. Mahavir Singh and Raj Singh were relations of Baljor; They obtained fabricated injury reports and falsely implicated him. They examined Vijai Singh Thakur, Advocate as (DW-1) to prove affidavit (Ex-Kha-1) of Smt. Brahma Devi. 10. After hearing the parties, Additional Sessions Judge, by the impugned judgment, held that FIR was ante-timed and had been lodged after due deliberation. Mahavir Singh and Raj Singh were relations of Baljor; They obtained fabricated injury reports and falsely implicated him. They examined Vijai Singh Thakur, Advocate as (DW-1) to prove affidavit (Ex-Kha-1) of Smt. Brahma Devi. 10. After hearing the parties, Additional Sessions Judge, by the impugned judgment, held that FIR was ante-timed and had been lodged after due deliberation. No pellet/bullet was recovered from the injuries of Raj Singh and Mahavir Singh nor there was any X-ray report of their injuries as such it was not proved that they had sustained gunshot injuries. In FIR, it has not been mentioned that Ilam Singh caught hold the head of the deceased and Vikesh caused gunshot injury to him; statements of the witnesses in this respect were improvements. Although Ankit was sleeping on the same cot on which the deceased was sleeping but he did not sustain gunshot injury. The ocular testimonies were not corroborated with medical evidence. Conduct of Baljor Singh, Raj Singh and Mahavir Singh subsequent to the incident was not natural. On these findings, he acquitted the accused from the charges. Hence, these appeals have been filed. 11. We have considered the arguments of the counsel for the parties and examined the record. In order to prove the charges, the prosecution has examined Baljor Singh (PW-1), Raj Singh (PW-3) and Mahavir (PW-5) as an eye witnesses of the incident and Harendra @ Bittoo (PW-2) as the witness of conspiracy. Baljor Singh (PW-1) stated that incident took place on 04/05.05.1999 at 11:30 PM. This witness himself, his son Sans Pal, his grand son Ankit and two relatives, namely Mahavir and Raj Singh were sleeping at his tube-well. He awoke at about 11:30 PM, on the sound of firing. Then he found that four persons were near to his son Sans Pal. All of them were firing. He recognized two of them in the light of torch. They were Ilam Singh and Vikesh, who were present in the Court. Sans Pal, Raj Singh and Mahavir sustained gunshot injuries. Mahavir and Raj Singh were his relatives, who were called by him to settle their dispute. The dispute was with his younger son Ravindra, who was demanding half share in his land. The dispute had taken place one day prior to the incident with Ravindra and his wife. He started to construct a demarcation line in middle of the field. Mahavir and Raj Singh were his relatives, who were called by him to settle their dispute. The dispute was with his younger son Ravindra, who was demanding half share in his land. The dispute had taken place one day prior to the incident with Ravindra and his wife. He started to construct a demarcation line in middle of the field. Ravindra and Savita went for constructing demarcation line. He asked them for not to destroy. Then Savita threatened them, beating her breast that she would get them burnt on pyre from hes father and uncle, who were man of that nature. Thereafter, Savita went to her father's house from the field at about 11:00 to 11:30 AM. Then he sent Onkar to call Raj Singh, from his village Sunderpur. He sent son of Raj Kumar to call Mahavir, from village Vin Khanpur. Ilam Singh was father of Savita and Vikesh was her brother. On the next day, Raj Singh came at 2:00 PM through train and Mahavir came at 4:00 PM. They took tea etc. After receiving firearm injuries, he took Raj Singh and Mahavir to the police station on the tractor. The dead body of Sans Pal remained there and other people had come there. He lodged the FIR at the police station. He got the complaint scribed from Ratan Singh in the field. He went to the police station, leaving Ankit to the house. After writing the complaint, Ratan read over and explained the complaint to him, then he put his thumb mark on it. The complaint was marked as Ex-Ka-1. In cross-examination, he stated that Sans Pal was his son and other son was Ravindra. The name of the wife of Sans Pal was Kamlesh. Sans Pal had two sons Harendra and Ankit and one daughter. Ankit is the witness in this case. The name of the wife of Ravindra is Savita, who was resident of village Titauli. The accused Ilam Singh was father-in-law of Ravindra and Vikesh was his brother-in-law. He owned thirty bigha land. He purchased 8.5 bigha land prior to this incident. He sold 9 bigha land of village Harchandpur, which was sold on low price. He purchased the land of Mahak Singh on high price. For purchasing this land, he had to arrange some more money. For which, Sans Pal had given Rs. 14000/-, Ravindra Singh had given Rs. He purchased 8.5 bigha land prior to this incident. He sold 9 bigha land of village Harchandpur, which was sold on low price. He purchased the land of Mahak Singh on high price. For purchasing this land, he had to arrange some more money. For which, Sans Pal had given Rs. 14000/-, Ravindra Singh had given Rs. 5000/-and he had brought Rs. 8000/-from Ilam Singh. It is incorrect to say that Ilam Singh had given Rs. 80000/-. Out of the land purchased, he had given 1.5 bigha land to each of his sons and remaining 6 bigha land was retained by him. Incident took place in rainy season and crops were being sown. He cannot give exact date. Mahavir was son of his real buwa and Raj Singh was son of his maternal uncle. Later on he said that Mahavir was son of buwa in his family. These two persons had come at 4:00 to 5:00 PM. 6-7 months prior to this incident, Ravindra had quarreled with him. After murder of Sans Pal, he executed sale deed of his land in favour of the wife of Sans Pal. He cannot say as to whether, money of Ilam Singh was returned or not. Ravindra married to Savita, daughter of Ilam Singh, 15-16 years ago. After one year of the marriage, he began to live separately from him. Ravindra now had two bigha more land. Sans Pal was doing service in Delhi Transport Corporation. At the time of incident, he was living with Sans Pal. After the incident, he took Mahavir and Raj Singh in trolley. On the date of incident, all of them had taken food. They ate dal, phulka, bura and ghee. Mahavir and Raj Singh had talked with Sans Pal but had not talked with Ravindra. Four persons shot fire. He awoke on the sound of fire. When he awoke, he saw that Vikesh was firing. Out of four persons, he recognized two of them, namely Ilam Singh and Vikesh. He could not recognize two other accused. Ilam Singh did not fire before him. He had pressed the head of Sans Pal. After the incident, he went to Kalu, who did telephone to the police station. The police came on the spot at about 1:00 AM. Prior to it, he had lodged FIR at the police station. The tractor was brought by Chandra Pal from the village. Ilam Singh did not fire before him. He had pressed the head of Sans Pal. After the incident, he went to Kalu, who did telephone to the police station. The police came on the spot at about 1:00 AM. Prior to it, he had lodged FIR at the police station. The tractor was brought by Chandra Pal from the village. He did not know as to who was the owner of the tractor. It is incorrect to say that six-seven rounds firing were made before him. It is incorrect to say that he had recognized the accused while running. It is correctly transcribed in the report that he had recognized the accused while running after firing. Raj Singh sustained two gunshot injuries and Mahavir sustained one gunshot injury. Ilam Singh and Vikesh caused gunshot injuries to Raj Singh and Mahavir. The assailants fled away towards east. At that time he was at a distance of 5-7 yards. Ilam Singh and Vikesh did not cover their faces. His wife Brahmkor was living with his younger son Ravindra, through out her life. At the time of incident, he and his wife had good terms. Ravindra and Sans Pal had good terms and their wives had good terms. Ravindra, Ilam Singh and Vikesh had no enmity with Raj Singh and Mahavir. Sans Pal was lying by the side of cot. When he saw him, he had sustained one gunshot injury on his back and one gunshot injury on his chest. There was no blood on the cot. Ankit was standing by the side of cot. Mahavir and Raj Singh were lying on their cot. Firing was done towards him, which hit by his side. 12. Raj Singh (PW-3) has stated that he was the son of maternal uncle of Baljor Singh, father of Sans Pal (the deceased). On 03.05.1999, Boljor sent for information through Onkar son of Teeka Ram and called him as the dispute was between his sons for partition of the grove land, which was purchased and in possession of Baljor. He came to village Sunhaida on 04.05.1999 at 2:00 PM through rail. On that day Mahavir, resident of village Khanpur, other relative had also come. They searched Ravindra in the day but could not found. After becoming dark, they went to eat food. After eating food, they came on tube-well for sleeping. He came to village Sunhaida on 04.05.1999 at 2:00 PM through rail. On that day Mahavir, resident of village Khanpur, other relative had also come. They searched Ravindra in the day but could not found. After becoming dark, they went to eat food. After eating food, they came on tube-well for sleeping. This tube-well was opposite to station, in grove, which belonged to Baljor. They started sleeping there after the train of 10:00 PM. He and Mahavir were sleeping on separate cots towards tube-well. Sans Pal and his son Ankit was sleeping on the cot lying towards the field. The cot of Baljor was towards north of them in the side of sugarcane. The incident had occurred at about 11:30 PM. He could not sleep due to mosquito bite. At that time four persons came on the tube-well. He asked them to come. He had recognized the accused Ilam Singh. Vikesh son of Ilam Singh asked him about Baljor. He asked what was the reason. Thereafter, they told that this was Raj Singh and Mahavir. The accused then went towards Sans Pal. As soon as they reached there, they shot fire. Baljor flashed torch and started shouting. Then he saw that Vikesh was armed with pistol. He recognized Ilam and Vikesh and could not recognized remaining two accused. Immediately they shot fire upon him. One bullet caused injury to him below his left ear and other caused injury below to his left shoulder. One bullet hit Mahavir, which torn his lip. Sans Pal died due to gunshot injury. He and Mahavir had obtained treatment from the doctor. In cross-examination, he stated that the dispute was in relation to the partition of the land. Ravindra constructed demarcation line in the field of Baljor. Ravindra used to say that he would take half share in the land. Investigating Officer recorded his statements after two-three days. If the fact relating to construction of demarcation line in the field of Baljor, has not been recorded in his statements, then he cannot give any reason. He has not given statements to Investigating Officer that on that day, there was dark night and he could not recognized the accused. If in his statements the fact that “he had recognized the accused Ilam Singh; Vikesh son of Ilam Singh asked him about Baljor” had not been written then he could not give any reason. 13. He has not given statements to Investigating Officer that on that day, there was dark night and he could not recognized the accused. If in his statements the fact that “he had recognized the accused Ilam Singh; Vikesh son of Ilam Singh asked him about Baljor” had not been written then he could not give any reason. 13. Mahavir (PW-5) has stated that Baljor was the son of his maternal uncle. About 9 years ago, he came to village Sunhaida on the call of Baljor. Ravindra and Baljor had dispute in relation to the land. He went there for partition of the land. Ravindra did not meet him up to 5:00 PM, there. They thought that he would meet in morning. After eating food, in evening, they went on the tube-well for sleeping. He, one person of village Sadarpur and Baljor were there. Thereafter, Sans Pal and his younger son also came there. They slept at 10:00 PM, after smoking hukka. At about 11:00 to 11:30 PM, Sans Pal was shot. He awoke. He recognized Vikesh along with Ravindra, among the persons, who were shooting. He could not recognize other accused. There were total four persons. They fired upon him also, which caused injury to him. They shot upon the man of Sadarpur. All the four accused fled away. Apart from Vikesh, he neither saw any one nor recognize them. They went to the police station on tractor, from where they were sent to Ervin Hospital Delhi, where obtained treatment from the doctor. In cross-examination, he stated that Baljor had flashed the torch. He did not have torch. Baljor was sleeping at a distance of 5-7 paces in north, from him. He awoke on the sound of gunshot. When he awoke, Baljor had already awaken. When he received gunshot injury, blood had come in his eyes and he cold not see anything. 14. So far as the motive of the incident is concerned, Baljor stated that he had sold 9 bigha land of village Harchandpur, on low price. Thereafter, he purchased 8.5 bigha land of Mahak Singh on high price. For purchasing this land, Sans Pal had given Rs. 14000/-, Ravindra Singh had given Rs. 5000/-and Ilam Singh had given Rs. 8000/-to him. Out of the land purchased, he had given 1.5 bigha land to each of his sons and remaining land was retained by him. Thereafter, he purchased 8.5 bigha land of Mahak Singh on high price. For purchasing this land, Sans Pal had given Rs. 14000/-, Ravindra Singh had given Rs. 5000/-and Ilam Singh had given Rs. 8000/-to him. Out of the land purchased, he had given 1.5 bigha land to each of his sons and remaining land was retained by him. Ravindra was demanding half share in this land. In this respect, the dispute had taken place one day prior to the incident when Ravindra and his wife Savita started to construct a demarcation line in middle of the field, which was objected by him. He admitted that his wife Brahmkor was living with Ravindra, through out her life. At the time of incident, he and his wife had good terms, his sons Ravindra and Sans Pal had good terms and their wives had good terms between them. Ravindra, Ilam Singh and Vikesh had no enmity with Raj Singh and Mahavir. He stated that Ravindra was living separately from about 15 years, prior to the incident. From the statement of Baljor Singh (PW-1), it is not proved that the accused had any motive to commit murder Sans Pal or to cause gunshot injury to the relatives Raj Singh and Mahavir. The dispute was between Baljor Singh and Ravindra in respect of partition of the land purchased by Baljor Singh. But Baljor Singh did not receive any injury. 15. Supreme Court in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra, (1973) 2 SCC 793 , has held that proof of motive satisfies the judicial mind about the likelihood of the authorship but its absence only demands deeper forensic search and cannot undo the effect of evidence otherwise sufficient. Motives of men are often subjective, submerged and unamenable to easy proof that Courts have to go without clear evidence thereon if other clinching evidence exists. In the case in hand the enmity with Sita Ram being active and admitted, the pique against Hariba, his loyal dependent, is understandable. In Vijay Shankar v. State of Haryana, (2015) 12 SCC 644 , it has been held that in each and every case, it was not incumbent on the prosecution to prove the motive for the crime. Often, motive is indicated to heighten the probability of the offence that the accused was impelled by that motive to commit the offence. In Vijay Shankar v. State of Haryana, (2015) 12 SCC 644 , it has been held that in each and every case, it was not incumbent on the prosecution to prove the motive for the crime. Often, motive is indicated to heighten the probability of the offence that the accused was impelled by that motive to commit the offence. Proof of motive only adds to the weight and value of evidence adduced by the prosecution. If the prosecution is able to prove its case on motive, it will be a corroborative piece of evidence. But even if the prosecution has not been able to prove its case on motive that will not be a ground to throw the prosecution case nor does it corrode the credibility of the prosecution case. Absence of proof of motive only demands careful scrutiny of evidence adduced by the prosecution. In the present case, absence of convincing evidence as to motive makes the court to be circumspect in the matter of assessment of evidence and this aspect was not kept in view by the High Court and the trial court. In Abdul Waheed v. State of U.P., (2016) 1 SCC 583 , it has been held that proof of motive of the accused towards the deceased heightens the possibility of the crime. Proof of motive adds weight and value to the evidence of the eyewitnesses. 16. So far as the place of occurrence and manner of assault is concerned, according to the version of FIR, Sans Pal and his son Ankit were sleeping at one cot. Assailants came and opened fire, on which Baljor awoke and saw that Sans Pal was lying beside his cot and one of the assailant caused gunshot injury to him, from close range. Thereafter, they fled away towards north and while running, they made another fire in sugarcane field. Baljor in his statements under Section 161 Cr.P.C. stated same facts. But Baljor Singh (PW-1) in his statements in Court made material improvements and stated that when he awoke, he saw in the light of torch that Vikesh was firing and Ilam Singh had caught hold the head of Sans Pal. Firing was done by four accused. Raj Singh (PW-3) stated that although he started sleeping at about 10:00 PM but he could not sleep up to 11:30 PM due to mosquito bite. Firing was done by four accused. Raj Singh (PW-3) stated that although he started sleeping at about 10:00 PM but he could not sleep up to 11:30 PM due to mosquito bite. At about 11:30 PM four assailants came near his cot. Vikesh son of Ilam Singh asked him about Baljor. Then he replied that what was the reason. Thereafter, they told that this was Raj Singh and Mahavir. The accused then went towards Sans Pal. As soon as they reached there, they shot fire. Baljor flashed torch and started shouting. Then he saw that Vikesh was armed with pistol. He recognized Ilam and Vikesh and could not recognize remaining two accused. Immediately they shot fire upon them. One bullet caused injury to him below his left ear and other caused injury below to his left shoulder. One bullet injury was caused to Mahavir. Mahavir (PW-5) stated that they slept at 10:00 PM, after smoking hukka. At about 11:00 to 11:30 PM, Sans Pal was shot. He recognized Vikesh along with Ravindra, among the persons, who were shooting. He could not recognize other accused. There were total four persons. They fired upon him also, which caused injury to him. They fired upon the man of Sadarpur. All the four accused fled away. Apart from Vikesh, he neither saw anyone nor recognized them. In cross-examination, he stated that he awoke on the sound of gunshot. 17. There are material contradiction in the statements of the witnesses. According to Raj Singh (PW-3), after coming, all the four accused fired upon Sans Pal, who was sleeping on the cot along with his son Ankit. This fact is not corroborated with the statement of SI Satya Pratap Singh (PW7), who stated that either on the cot or below the cot of Sans Pal, no blood was found by him at the time of spot inspection. Ankit was sleeping on the same cot but he did not receive any injury. According to Raj Singh (PW-3) and Mahavir (PW-5), firing upon them were done by the accused, after firing upon Sans Pal but according to Baljor Singh (PW-1), after firing upon Sans Pal the accused fled away towards north. While running they fired in sugarcane field. Mahavir (PW-3) named Ravindra also to be present at the time of incident but Baljor Singh and Raj Singh (Pws-1 and 3) did not name Ravindra. 18. While running they fired in sugarcane field. Mahavir (PW-3) named Ravindra also to be present at the time of incident but Baljor Singh and Raj Singh (Pws-1 and 3) did not name Ravindra. 18. On the body of Sans Pal, two gunshot injuries were found. Role of firing has been assigned to four accused. According to the witnesses firing were done from close range and at that time Sans Pal was sleeping on the cot. Ocular testimony is not corroborated with medical evidence. 19. So far as conspiracy is concerned, Baljor Singh (PW-1) and Harendra @ Bitto (PW-2) have stated that when the dispute in relation to construction of demarcation line took place, then Savita threatened them, beating her breast that she would get them burnt on pyre from his father and uncle, who were man of that nature. Thereafter, Savita went to her father's house from the field at about 11:00 to 11:30 AM. There is no evidence to prove that Savita actually reached to her father's house and made any plan with her father Ilam Singh and brother Vikesh to commit murder of Sans Pal. The fact relating to conspiracy has not been proved. 20. From the aforesaid discussion, it appears that this was a night incident and had taken place at 11:30 PM. The witnesses were sleeping and could not see/recognize the real assailants. The charges are not proved beyond reasonable doubts. The judgment of acquittal does not warrant interference by this Court. The appeals have no merit and are dismissed.