JUDGMENT : R.M. CHHAYA, J. 1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Gandhingar in Sessions Case No. 9 of 2013 dated 21.4.2015. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that Brijesh @ Chako Barot was working in Arvind Mill and he had given loan of Rs. 40,000/- to the appellant. It is further the case of the prosecution that on 15.09.2012, the deceased as well as appellant driving in Rickshaw belonging to Manojbhai Raval from Charada to Gojariya. It is further the case of the prosecution that there was oral altercation between the deceased and the appellant as regards the above mentioned advanced by the deceased. It is the case of the prosecution that on the said day at about 9.30 p.m. while deceased and the appellant were returning from Gojariya towards Charada in the Rickshaw of Manojbhai Raval and it is further the case that the appellant assaulting the deceased near Bilodara village. It is further the case of the prosecution that as the deceased attempted to ran away to save his life at that moment also the appellant inflicted blow with knife and it is thus alleged that the appellant has committed an offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. An FIR came to be registered as CR-I-133 of 2012 with Mansa Police Station. The appellant came to be arrested and investigation was carried and charge sheet came to be filed before the concerned Magistrate and ultimately case was committed to the learned Sessions Court, Gandhinagar and was registered as Sessions Case No. 09 of 2013. 2.1. The appellant did not plead guilty and charge for the offences under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code came to be framed at Exh.2 on 22.2.2013. The prosecution examined 22 prosecution witnesses and also relied upon the documentary evidence, more particularly, inquest panchnama, panchnama of scene of the offence, FSL report, panchnama of recovery of clothes of the deceased, call details. The prosecution also relied upon the statement of the PW-15 Manojkumar Bhalabhai Raval - the Rickshaw Driver at Exh.111. The prosecution examined 22 prosecution witnesses and also relied upon the documentary evidence, more particularly, inquest panchnama, panchnama of scene of the offence, FSL report, panchnama of recovery of clothes of the deceased, call details. The prosecution also relied upon the statement of the PW-15 Manojkumar Bhalabhai Raval - the Rickshaw Driver at Exh.111. The learned Sessions Court upon appreciation of the evidence on record, by the impugned judgment and order of conviction convicted the appellant for the offences punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been pleased to sentence the appellant to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default rigorous imprisonment of six months. The Sessions Court has also convicted the appellant for the offences under Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act and has sentenced the appellant to undergo simple imprisonment for one month with a fine of Rs. 100/- and in default to undergo simple imprisonment of 5 days and Sessions Court has also been pleased to provide that all the sentences shall run concurrently and has also given benefit of set off to the appellant accused. 2.2. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Gandhinagar, the appellant-accused has preferred present appeal. 3. Heard Ms. Mayuri Chauhan, learned advocate for the appellant and Mr. Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent State. Ms. Chauhan, learned advocate for the appellant has relied upon the oral deposition of PW-1 Krunal Niranjanbhai Yagnik, PW-2 Surendrasinh S. Barad, PW-3 Ghanshyamsinh Darbar Scientific Officer, PW-4 Jinayatin Desai Scientific Officer, PW-5 Lallubhai Hartanbhai Desai Pancha of Place of Panchnama, PW-6 Illeshkumar Gordhanbhai Patel ASI Mansa Police Station, PW-7 Ashokbhai Chaudhari, PW-8 Ghanshyambhai Visabhai Patel, PW-9 Umesh Patel, PW-10 Bhanubhai K. Patel, PW-11 Dashrathji Shankerji Vaghela, PW-12 Dr. Bhalabhai Parmar, PW-13 Dr. Yogini Dineshkumar Vyas, PW-14 Ashokbhai C. Barot, PW-15 Manojbhai Raval, PW-16 Hitesbhai Vyas, PW-17 Hashmukhbhai Parmar, PW-18 Jitendra Patel, PW-19 Vipulbai Bhikhabhai Barot, PW-20 Mukeshbhai Patel, PW-21 Girishbhai Mangalbhai Patel and PW-22 Bhupendrakumar Dave. Ms. Chauhan also further relied upon documentary evidences i.e. Panchnama of the recovery of weapon knife, Panchanma of recovery of clothes of the deceased, statement of eyewitness Manoj Raval PW-15 and call details. Ms. Chauhan, learned advocate has contended as under. 3.1. Ms. Chauhan also further relied upon documentary evidences i.e. Panchnama of the recovery of weapon knife, Panchanma of recovery of clothes of the deceased, statement of eyewitness Manoj Raval PW-15 and call details. Ms. Chauhan, learned advocate has contended as under. 3.1. That though the prosecution has come out with a case that weapon knife is recovered wherein bloodstains were found. In the serological report, blood report is unidentified and therefore, it cannot be said that the link is established. 3.2. It was also contended that the prosecution has not collected the blood sample of the appellant accused. That the Nodel Officer is not examined. 3.3. That the statement of Rickshaw driver is recorded on the next day of the incident. It was contended that the Rickshaw Driver PW-15 is not an independent witness but interested witness because had advanced money to the appellant accused. It was also further contended that the conduct of eyewitness is also doubtful as instead of calling for medical help by making a call to 108 or informing the police, the eyewitness went to the residence of the deceased and informed his family members. 3.4. It was also contended considering the number of injuries found on the body of the deceased, it is not possible that such injury and in such number can be inflicted in such a short duration to time. It was contended that as per the evidence on record, there is possibility of involvement of other persons. It was also contended that weapon used is not a regular knife but is apparatus which is used for the agriculture purpose and even as per the panchnama of knife, the same is found to be bend from the top of it. It was also contended that place of occurrence also is changed by the prosecution. 3.5. It was contended that though as per the prosecution, eyewitness PW-15 was present, even mobile of PW-15 is not recovered by the prosecution. 3.6. Referring to the deposition of IO, it was contended by the learned advocate for the appellant that weapon knife has been recovered from the land which belongs to the forest department. 3.7. It was also contended that the prosecution has not been able to establish or prove the motive. 3.6. Referring to the deposition of IO, it was contended by the learned advocate for the appellant that weapon knife has been recovered from the land which belongs to the forest department. 3.7. It was also contended that the prosecution has not been able to establish or prove the motive. According to the learned advocate for the appellant, the prosecution has not brought on record any evidence as regards borrowing of money either by the appellant from the deceased or eyewitness PW-15. On the aforesaid grounds, it was contended by Ms. Chauhan that the learned Sessions Court has wrongly appreciated the evidence on record and has committed an error in recording the order of conviction. It was therefore, submitted that the appeal be allowed. 4. Per contra, Mr. Hardik Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has relied upon the deposition of Prosecution Witnesses, more particularly, deposition of Jeena Yatishbhai Desai at Exh.25, Lallubhai Hartanbhai Desai - Deputy Mamlatdar at Exh.40, deposition of Manojbhai Raval at Exh.111 PW-15 and the deposition of Hiteshbhai Vyas at Exh.116 PW-16 learned Judicial Magistrate before whom statement of PW-15 eyewitness came to be recorded under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and so also depositions of other prosecution witnesses. Mr. Soni, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has contended as under: “My name is Raval Manojkumar Bhalabhai, age about 23 Years, Occupation: Driving, Residing at: Charada Char Rasta, Beside Raval Vas, Taluka: Mansa do hereby state on solemn affirmation that I will speak truth only. Mehulkumar Jagadishbhai Nayak met me at Charada village at 07:00 o'clock in the evening on 15.09.2012 and told me that I am going to Gojaria, do you want to come? Therefore, I agreed. We started rickshaw and drove ahead. Meanwhile, Mehulbhai telephoned Brijeshbhai and asked him as to where he is. He replied that I am standing near Lalu's shop beside Chandan Lati. Mehulbhai told me to take rickshaw there and I took rickshaw there and stopped it. Thereafter, Mehul told Brijesh that let us go to Gojaria to have food and Brijesh told that I have already finished my dinner. I do not want to come. Therefore, Mehul told him that you come with me even if you do not want to dine. Thereafter, we all three persons went to Gozaria. Thereafter, Mehul told Brijesh that let us go to Gojaria to have food and Brijesh told that I have already finished my dinner. I do not want to come. Therefore, Mehul told him that you come with me even if you do not want to dine. Thereafter, we all three persons went to Gozaria. Both the said persons were having snacks over there and also asked me as to whether would you like to have snacks and I said yes. As Brijesh had already taken dinner, I and Mehul were having snacks. Meanwhile, they both were talking and Brijesh said that I have lent you Rupees Forty Thousand by pawning my jewellery, you give me Thirty Thousand Rupees out of the same, so that, I can give it to the Pawnee and get back my jewellery. Thereafter, we both went to fill gas at Gojariya Gas Pump, where the gas was not available. Therefore, we were returning to the house at Charada. The place known as Aandhilo no Vadlo is located 2 km before Charada. When we reached at this place, Mehul stabbed Brijesh with a knife in my rickshaw. Therefore, Brijesh shouted that Munna (Manoj means I) I have been stabbed with a knife. Therefore, I stopped the rickshaw at the side of the road immediately. Thereafter, I asked Mehul to stop and as to what happened to him. When such discussion was going on between us, Brijesh got down of the rickshaw and ran towards Titodan. Therefore, Mehul kicked me and ran after Brijesh. Thereafter, I started my rickshaw and went towards Charada cross road and I informed the persons sitting there that I had gone and such incident took place. Thereafter, they told me to go to Brijesh's house to inform. Therefore, I went to the Baarotwaas and informed about it to Jaydeep Barot. Thereafter, when I asked him as to who Chako was, he replied that Chako is related to us but he lives in Ahmedabad. Thereafter, he said that Kalabhai's son is also Chako. Therefore, we rushed to Kalabhai's house and informed them that Nayak Mehul has inflicted a blow of knife to Brijesh. Therefore, they all asked me to come with them and show the place where they had scuffled. Thereafter, we went to the place where Mehul and Brijesh had quarreled by a vehicle of one of the Barots. Therefore, we rushed to Kalabhai's house and informed them that Nayak Mehul has inflicted a blow of knife to Brijesh. Therefore, they all asked me to come with them and show the place where they had scuffled. Thereafter, we went to the place where Mehul and Brijesh had quarreled by a vehicle of one of the Barots. We searched that boy for half an hour, but we could not find him. Thereafter, when we searched him slowly at the sides of the road under the light of the bikes, one of the bikers saw him and he said that Chako is here. When we all went there, we found that the boy had died. Thereafter, we informed the police by making a phone call and the police came and I went to the police station along with them. The facts stated above by me are true and correct. I have dictated the above statement after reading and understanding it. It has been recorded as per my dictation. Signature (Raval Manojbhai Bhalabhai) Date: 19.10.2012 Before Me Sd/- Illegible JMFC, Mansa. I have given understanding to witness Manojbhai Bhalabhai that he is not bound to confess, and if he does so, any confession made by him will be used as evidence against him. I believe that this confession had been made voluntarily and it was made before me and in an audible manner to me. It was read over to the persons who made it and he admitted it to be true. The statements given by him depict complete and true report. Date: 19.10.2012 Sd/- Illegible JMFC, Mansa.” 4.1. That, though the PW-15 Manojbhai Raval is a sole eyewitness of the offence the version of the said sole eyewitness is fully corroborated by the prosecution. 4.2. Referring and relying upon the statement of the said eyewitness under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure at Exh.128, it was contended by Mr. Soni that the statement clearly proves the guilty of the appellant. Mr. Soni further relying upon the depositions of the learned Judicial Magistrate PW-16 at Exh.116 contended that the version of the sole eyewitness under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure clearly corroborates that the statement made by the said witness under Section 164 and the deposition of learned Judicial Magistrate PW-16 Exh.116. Mr. Soni further relying upon the depositions of the learned Judicial Magistrate PW-16 at Exh.116 contended that the version of the sole eyewitness under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure clearly corroborates that the statement made by the said witness under Section 164 and the deposition of learned Judicial Magistrate PW-16 Exh.116. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further referring to the serological report at Exh.35 contended that clothes recovered from the accused is found to be bloodstains and the same clearly matches with the blood group of the deceased being blood group “B.” 4.3. It was also contended that blood has been collected from the Rexine of the seat of the auto rickshaw of PW-15 Manojbhai Raval and the blood group found on the Rexine of the seat is blood group “B” which is blood group of the deceased. It was contended that the prosecution has been able to clearly established the motive. Referring to the deposition of PW-21 Exh.145 Girishbhai Patel, it was contended by Mr. Soni that when deceased and the appellant were having omelet at the lorry of said witness, the dispute was going on between the deceased and the appellant. 4.4. It was contended by Mr. Soni that the offence was committed during the monsoon season and therefore, no bloodstains had remained on the knife. Referring to the call details which are on record, it was contended by Mr. Soni that on the date of occurrence the mobile location of the deceased and the appellant were found to be at the same place. Referring to the deposition of doctor Yogini Vyas at Exh.94 who performed the postmortem upon the deceased, it was contended that death of the deceased was due to excessive blood loss and the injuries sustained, more particularly, 11 injuries sustained by the deceased. According to learned Additional Public Prosecutor, all the witnesses have corroborated with the case of the prosecution. Referring to and relying upon the oral testimony of PW-12 Dr. Bharatbhai Parmar at Exh.87, it was contended by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that the injuries sustained by the accused were due to the fight between two persons. It was also further contended that the FSL report at Exh.35 and 38 clearly established the fact that blood group “B” found upon the T-shirt and Jeans of the appellant matches with the blood group of the deceased. It was also further contended that the FSL report at Exh.35 and 38 clearly established the fact that blood group “B” found upon the T-shirt and Jeans of the appellant matches with the blood group of the deceased. It was also further contended that the appellant was carrying knife especially when he went out for dinner clearly established conclusively that the act of the appellant was premeditating with an intention to commit murder of the deceased. 4.5. Referring to the observations made by the learned Sessions Judge, it was contended by Mr. Soni that the learned Sessions Court has rightly come to the conclusion that the version of the sole eyewitness PW-15 is fully corroborated by the prosecution as well as oral testimony of other witnesses and is proved beyond doubt by the serological report at Exh.35 and 38. On the aforesaid grounds, Mr. Soni submitted that appeal deserves to be dismissed and order of conviction deserves to be confirmed. 4.6. Mr. Soni further relying upon the deposition of PW-17 Hashmukh @ Ashokkumar Rughnath Parmar at Exh.134 contended that the said witness who happens to be vendor of clothes has identified the clothes which were produced by the appellant-accused on the next day of incident. 5. No other and further submissions, grounds and contentions have been raised by the learned advocates for the respective parties. 6. Upon considering the submissions made on behalf of the learned advocate for the respective parties and on perusal of the original Record and Proceedings as well as paper book and the observations made by the learned Sessions Judge, it clearly transpires that prosecution has examined as many as 22 witness, which are as under. 6.1. The prosecution has examined Krunal Niranjanbhai PW-1 at Exh.10. The said witness was panch witness and inquest panchnama was drawn in his presence. He has narrated the injuries found near ear and on chest and on two side of the body and on several parts of body like on chick, leg and it was mentioned in panchnama and it was signed by two panchas and police officer. In his cross examination he has stated that he know the deceased and injuries are done by sharp instrument are mentioned by him. He has further stated that measurements of injuries are not taken at that time. In his cross examination he has stated that he know the deceased and injuries are done by sharp instrument are mentioned by him. He has further stated that measurements of injuries are not taken at that time. He has also stated in his cross examination that it was not written that bloodstains on clothes of body. 6.2. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mr. Surendrasinh Shankarsinh Bard PW-2 at Exh.15. The said witness was panch witness and panchnama of clothes was done before police officer which is show at mark 7/6 and the said articles are 1, 2 and 3 with bloodstains and there were cut marks at different place. In his cross examination, he ha stated that he is doing business of footwear and he had not gone when panchnama was done. He has further stated that it is not true that panchnama was not drawn. He has stated that he did not know panchnama has to be done and he gone is not true. 6.3. The prosecution has examined Mr. Ghanshyam Pratapsinh Dabar PW-3 at Exh.22 Scientific Officer at FSL Gandhinagar and he has stated that he was called by Mansa Police for visitation of the site and I gone to the site and inspected the place and detailed report was prepared and same was handed over to police. In his cross examination, he has stated that it is not true that I had not inspected and wrong report is submitted without examined in favour of police. 6.4. The prosecution has examined Mr. Jina Yatish Desai PW-4 at Exh.25 Scientific Officer, Ahmedabad and he has stated that Police had sent Ravangi Nodh with certificate of seal for Mansa CR 133 of 2012 with sealed Muddamal. He has further stated that thereafter the said articles were examined. He has stated that medical officers Ms. Yogini and Mr. Parmar had took blood samples of Victim and Accused with yadi at Exh.31 and 32. He has further stated that serological report was prepared and detail report is given. In his cross examination, he has stated that it is not true that no examination was done and stereotyped report is prepared. He has further stated that it is true that no remarks of Postmortem and Postmortem report was not sent by the Doctor to examine in the case. 6.5. The prosecution has examined Mr. In his cross examination, he has stated that it is not true that no examination was done and stereotyped report is prepared. He has further stated that it is true that no remarks of Postmortem and Postmortem report was not sent by the Doctor to examine in the case. 6.5. The prosecution has examined Mr. Lalubhai Hartanbhai Desai PW-5 at Exh.40 and he has stated that yadi was sent for FIR 133/12 Mansa for preparing map of site. He has stated that he had inspected on 8.10.2012 and inspection was done and had prepared the site map and handed over the Mamlatdar and same was sent to the Police. In his cross examination, he has stated that it is not true that he has not received yadi and he had not gone and prepared the map of site. He has stated that it is true that the panchnama was received by him along with yadi which is at Exh.46. He has further stated that murder was done on the road of Charada and he has not mentioned any grazing land in map. He has stated that nobody was accompanied and he had not seen the site earlier. 6.6. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mr. Ileshkumar Gordhanbhai Patel PW-6 at Exh.47 ASI Mansa Police Station and he has stated that on 16.09.2012 telephone worthy came from Charada from mobile that Chako (Brijesh) hit on stomach on the road of Charada and same was written down and enter as Janvajog Entry in the Register and complaint was given before PI by Ashok of Charada was forwarded to register entry 05 of 2012. He has further stated that FIR was drawn in FIR Book and same was forwarded to trial Court and investigation was handed over to PI Dave. In his cross examination, he has stated that it is not true that telephone word by was received and he has further stated that no complaint is received and wrongly FIR registered in the FIR. 6.7. The prosecution has examined Mr. Ashokbhai Mansingbhai Chaudhary PW-7 at Exh.53. He has stated that on 16.09.2012 the police called for panchnama at Bilodara with Vipulbhai Chaudhary and said site was shown by Manojbhai Raval. He has stated that the site is adjoining to the road and Mr. Barot was killed and blood stains were found. 6.7. The prosecution has examined Mr. Ashokbhai Mansingbhai Chaudhary PW-7 at Exh.53. He has stated that on 16.09.2012 the police called for panchnama at Bilodara with Vipulbhai Chaudhary and said site was shown by Manojbhai Raval. He has stated that the site is adjoining to the road and Mr. Barot was killed and blood stains were found. He has further stated that Police had taken the Articles of grass, sand, illegible fancing wire, belt, knife was seized and the panchnama of the said articles were drawn. He has stated that he had not known the survey number of the land and articles 4 to 14 are the same. He has further stated that on the same day other panchnama was drawn at the site of offence and Rickshaw was found bearing registration no. 1302 and blood stains was found on the seat of Rickshaw and said pieces were taken in sealed condition. The said panchnama is at Mark 7/9 at Exh.55. In his cross examination, he has stated that police had informed him to attend the panchnama as panchas and police had affixed the seals. He has further stated that the wire was covered with sand and police had written the panchnama and I had read and signed the same. He has further stated that he has not seen dead-body there. 6.8. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mr. Ghanshyambhai V. Patel PW-8 at Exh.71. He has stated that on 16.09.2012 the police had called me as panchas with Patel Umeshbhai and we have given consent for same. He has further stated that two mobiles and three sim cards were seized and panchnama of the same was drawn. He has stated that on 17.09.2012 the panchnama was drawn and accused and police were present. He has further stated the panchnama of place of occurrence was drawn and thereafter went to near Unjha Railway Crossing where the clothes were seized. He has further stated that the lorry was shown wherein clothes purchased and panchnama was draw. In his cross examination, he has stated that police had called to work in panchnama. He has further stated that the name of the lorry owner was not asked by us but police asked the same. He has further stated that it is not true that panchnamas were not drawn in our presence. 6.9. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mr. Umeshkumar Narayanbhai Patel PW-9 at Exh.76. He has further stated that the name of the lorry owner was not asked by us but police asked the same. He has further stated that it is not true that panchnamas were not drawn in our presence. 6.9. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mr. Umeshkumar Narayanbhai Patel PW-9 at Exh.76. He has stated that on 16.09.2012 the police had called me as panchas along other panch Ghanshyambhai at police Station and accused person was there and I was found injury on finger of right had of the accused. He has further stated that two mobiles were found and same was written in panchnama and all items were seized. He has further stated that Articles 20 and 23 are the same and panchnama was drawn at Exh.72. In his cross examination, he has stated that it is not true that no items were checked from accused and not seized by drawing panchnama. 6.10. The prosecution has examined Mr. Bhanubhai Keshavlal Patel PW-10 at Exh.77. He has stated that on 17.09.2012. I was called as Panch by Police with Ghabshyam Patel and I have given consent. He has further stated that we have gone to place of occurrence and panchnama was drawn in presence of accused and police and blood stains were found and knife was also recovered from the same. He has further stated that clothes were recovered and seized by drawing panchnama. In his cross examination, he has stated that I was going to police station for the work of panchnama. He has stated that the writer had written panchnama and same was signed at the places after reading the panchnama. He has further stated that it is not true that the panchnama was not drawn in our presence. 6.11. The prosecution has examined Mr. Dashrathji Shankarji Vaghela PW-11 at Exh.79. He has stated that he is working as Dy. Chitnish Branch with Collector, Gandhinagar and Additional Collector had published public notice and copy of the same has been sent to the Police of Mansa and same was exhibited at Exh.81 and 82. 6.12. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mr. Bhalabhai F. Parmar Medical Officer PW-12 at Exh.9. He has stated that on 16.09.2012 a yadi from Mansa Police Station was came for treatment of Mehulkumar @ Kalu Jagdish Nair and Muhulkumar has not stated anything about his injury. 6.12. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mr. Bhalabhai F. Parmar Medical Officer PW-12 at Exh.9. He has stated that on 16.09.2012 a yadi from Mansa Police Station was came for treatment of Mehulkumar @ Kalu Jagdish Nair and Muhulkumar has not stated anything about his injury. He has further stated that wound on lady finger of right hand 2 x 0.5 cm sized wound which may be as per my opinion fresh injury caused by blunt weapon and may be cleared within 7 to 10 days. He has further stated that the identification mark of Mehulkumar is on right hand injury. In his cross examination, he has stated that it is true that police has not shown any weapon and has not taken my statement regarding the same. He has further stated that it may possible that person may lift the weapon by different grip. He has further stated that it is true that I have not noted skin color or wound color. He has further stated that it is not true that injury may be depended by thick or broad weapon. 6.13. The prosecution has examined Dr. Yogini Dineshkumar Vyas Medical Officer at Exh.94 who performed postmortem upon the dead-body of the deceased. The said witness has narrated injuries found on the body of the deceased and in her examination-in-chief has deposed that different type of internal and external injuries were found on the body of the deceased. The said witness has stated that the cause of death was internal cut of organs of body and hemorrhage of blood from the body was found. She has further stated that PM Note No. 31 of 2012 was written and sealed by me and same is exhibited at Mark 17/14. She has further stated that such injury may be caused by Article No. 11 weapon to cause death and injuries were Ante Mortem and may cause such injuries. In her cross examination, she has stated that it is not true that no PM was done nor any dead-body was found. She has further stated that PM Note was prepared after doing the PM and it is true that I did not sign any soil particle on body or clothes. She has further stated that it is true that the injury's size depends upon the weapon size and shape. She has further stated that PM Note was prepared after doing the PM and it is true that I did not sign any soil particle on body or clothes. She has further stated that it is true that the injury's size depends upon the weapon size and shape. She has further stated that it is not true that wound become upon the thickness of blade of weapon. She has stated that I could not say anything about whether such injury may cause by single weapon or not. 6.14. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mr. Ashokbhai Chhotalal Barot PW-14 at Exh.108 father of the deceased. He has stated that on 15.09.2012 at about 9.45 pm, Raval Manojbhai came with his Rickshaw bearing No. GH-1302 and told about the death of Brijesh by Kalu Naik with knife in Sim Titod. He has stated that dead-body was found with blood stains and wound. He has stated that Jitbubhai had telephoned to Mansa Police Station and police came there and thereafter the dead-body was taken to Mansa Hospital and postmortem was done. He has further stated that I had given complaint and has identified clothes of the deceased at Articles 1 to 3. In his cross examination, he has stated that whatever stated in chief, other things and facts, I do not know the same. He has stated that the said things were not mentioned in my complaint. 6.15. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mr. Manojkumar Bhalabhai Raval PW-15 at Exh.111 sole eyewitness. He has stated that deceased was murdered on 15.09.2012. He has stated that I met Mehul and he want to go Gozaria and I gone with him in my Rickshaw, at that time, Mehual had called Brijesh Barot. He has stated that I stopped the Rickshaw and Mehul had told him to sit in Rickshaw for lunch but he refused. He has further stated that Brijesh Barot come with us and when we reached Vasai Highway, Mehul told to stop Rickshaw for breakfast. He has further stated that Mehul and Brijesh were discussed about money and Brijesh told to give Rs. 40,000/- first as it was lent. He has further stated after discussion, Brijesh had told to give money after 2 to 3 days. He has further stated that thereafter Mehul told me to take at Samau and thereafter Mehul told me to take towards Govindpura. 40,000/- first as it was lent. He has further stated after discussion, Brijesh had told to give money after 2 to 3 days. He has further stated that thereafter Mehul told me to take at Samau and thereafter Mehul told me to take towards Govindpura. He has stated that Mehul had given knife blow to Brijesh. He has further stated that Mehul was sitting at right side and Brijesh was sitting on left side and has stated that Brijesh got down and run away. He has further stated that Mehul was having knife in his hand, he ran towards Brijesh and I tried to run back them. He has further stated that thereafter I had gone to Barot Vas, Charda and informed the Ashokbhai about the incident. He further stated that all the persons went to the place of occurrence and they shown the Brijesh in injured condition. He has stated that as Brijesh was dead, police was come and police had taken statement. In his cross examination, he has stated that the incident was occurred on 15.09.2012. He has stated that it is not true that I had not seen on backside that Mehul has injured to Brijesh. It is not true that Brijesh had not got down from Rixa and I had not gone behind him. I had not heard the talk between the Brijesh and Mehul. He further stated that it is not true against Mehul I had deposed wrongly. 6.16. The prosecution has examined Hashmukhbhai Rughnathbhai Parmar PW-17 at Exh.134. He has stated that he doing work for selling ready made clothes of Paint Shirt and etc of Lorry near Railway under-bridge from 9 am to 7 pm. He has stated that before one year some unknown person boy came and he asked for Paint-Shirt and he has purchased by paying Rs. 110/-. 6.17. The prosecution examined Mr. Jitendrakumar L. Patel PW-18 at Exh.135. He has stated that on 15.09.2012 when I was setting at Barotvas at that time Manojbhai Raval came by Rickshaw to Ahsokbhai House and he told that Chaka @ Brijesh had injured by knife by accused near Bilodara sim. He has stated that he was going to the place of occurred in Car along with Vipul, Ashokbhai and Chetan where he has shown dead-body and thereafter I informed the police about the incident and also telephoned to 108. He has stated that he was going to the place of occurred in Car along with Vipul, Ashokbhai and Chetan where he has shown dead-body and thereafter I informed the police about the incident and also telephoned to 108. He has further stated that doctor had examined and declared him dead. In his cross examination, he has stated that on 15.09.2012 I had not informed the police at 9.30 pm about exact incident about Bilodara and Brijesh was found is not true. He has further stated that police took my statement on the next day and it is not true that Manoj, Mehul and Brijesh had gone together was not informed to anybody. 6.18. The prosecution has thereafter examined Vipulbhai Bhikhabhai Barot PW-19 at Exh.136. He has stated that on 15.09.2012 Manoj had told Ashok that Brijesh was injured by knife by Kala Nayak. He has stated that he was going to the place of occurred in Car along with Vipul, Ashokbhai, Jitendra, Manoj and Laxmanbhai where I have shouted but Brijesh was not found and brought torch wherein he was found injured and found dead. He has stated thereafter police was called by Jitendrabhai and police had come and panchnama was done and he was taken to Mansa Civil Hospital and police took my statement. In his cross examination, he has stated that it is true that Panchnama was not done on 15.09.2012 is true. He has further stated that it is not true that I had not actually seen the incident. 6.19. The prosecution has thereafter examined Mukeshbhai Prahladbhai Patel as PW-20 at Exh.141. He has stated that I am pilot in 108 at Mansa since 06 years and on 15.09.2012 I was on duty, at that time, medical technician was there on 22.14 pm from office go to Charada and when he reached there, person was injured and thereafter medical technician checked and declared dead. 6.20. The prosecution has thereafter examined Girishkumar M. Patel PW-21 at Exh.145. He has stated that I am doing business of omlet on lorry since 3 years and incident was occurred on last year. He has stated that one Rixa came with three persons at 8 to 8.30 pm and they gave the ordered for Khima and they eat and thereafter gave the money. He has further stated that one person is present in the Court. 6.21. He has stated that one Rixa came with three persons at 8 to 8.30 pm and they gave the ordered for Khima and they eat and thereafter gave the money. He has further stated that one person is present in the Court. 6.21. The prosecution has thereafter examined Bhupendra Natvarlal Dave PW-22 at Exh.165 Police Inspector of Mansa Police Station. The IO has deposed as to how the investigation was carried out by him. 7. Before considering the submissions made and depositions as noted herein above, the postmortem came to be performed by PW-13 Yogini D. Vyas. As per the said postmortem note, the body was of male aged 25 years who was put in red coloured T-Shirt with blue coloured jeans pent with brown underwear. It is also noticed that clothes were bloodstains and T-shirt is having cuts on both the sides and pent having cuts and even underwear was having cuts on posterior aspect. In column no. 17 as many as 52 injuries have been noticed, which are as under:- Injury No. 1 Obliquely downward and medialy directed stab incised wound from (Rt) mastoid region to pinna of (Rt) ear having clean cut margin and Sharp angle with clotted blood in and around wound 6 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. 2 Five, oblique stab incised wounds on (Rt) temporal region with clotted blood in and around wound 3 to 5 cm x o.5 cm x bone deep. 3 Verticle stab incised wound on mid part of (Rt) Paritotempral region 4 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. 4 Transverse stab incised wound on occipital region 3 cm x 0.5 cm x bone deep with clotted blood in and around wound. 5 Oblique stab incised wound extending from pinna of (Rt) ear to mendibular angle coming downward and medially 4 cm x 1 cm muscle deep with clotted blood in and around wound. 6 Verticle stab incised wound in front of (Rt) ear with clotted blood in and around wound 4 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep. 7 Verticle stab incised wound on (Rt) cheek with clotted blood in and around wound 4.5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep. 8 Obliquely mediolateral stab incised wound near (Lt) angle of mouth with clotted blood in and around wound 2 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep. 7 Verticle stab incised wound on (Rt) cheek with clotted blood in and around wound 4.5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep. 8 Obliquely mediolateral stab incised wound near (Lt) angle of mouth with clotted blood in and around wound 2 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep. 9 Transverse stab incised wound on anterior aspect of neck starting from Adam's Apple upto outer aspect of (Lt) side of neck with clotted blood in and around wound 6 cm x 2 cm x 4 cm. 10 Transverse Abrassion 2 xm below (Lt) ear 4 cm x o.5 cm. 11 Transverse stab incised wound (Rt) supracalvicular foss with clotted blood in and around wound 3.5 cm x 2 cm x 4 cm. 12 Oblique downward and medially directed stab incised wound on (Rt) side of neck at the level of thyroid cartilages with clotted blood in and around wound 4 cm x 1.5 cm x 3 cm. 13 Transverse stab incised wound on rape of neck with clotted blood in and around wound 2.5 cm x 1.5 cm x 2 cm. 14 Posterio anteriorly directed incised wound on tip of (Rt) should 7 cm x 0.5 cm x skin deep. 15 Transverse abrasion on posterio lateral aspect of (Rt) shoulder 2 cm x o.5 cm. 16 Irregular abrasion 2 cm below injury No. 15. 17 Oblique downward and Medialy directed stab incised wound on upper 1/3rd of lateral aspect of (Rt) arm 5 cm x 2 cm x bone deep with clotted blood in and around wound. 18 Oblique downward and Medialy directed stab incised wound on dorsal aspect of (Rt) hand reaching upto 3rd web space with clotted blood in and around wound 10 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep. 19 Oblique stab incised wound on dorsal aspect of promixal phalanx of (Rt) rind finger directed downward and medially 1.5 cm x 1 cm x bone deep. 20 Transverse stab incised wound on medial aspect of middle 1/3rd of (Rt) arm with clotted blood in and around would 4 cm x 1.5 cm x 3 cm. 21 Oblique stab incised wound on dorsal aspect of middle plalanx of (Rt) ring finger with clotted blood in and around wound 4 cm x o.5 cm x bone deep. 20 Transverse stab incised wound on medial aspect of middle 1/3rd of (Rt) arm with clotted blood in and around would 4 cm x 1.5 cm x 3 cm. 21 Oblique stab incised wound on dorsal aspect of middle plalanx of (Rt) ring finger with clotted blood in and around wound 4 cm x o.5 cm x bone deep. 22 Verticle stab incised wound on lateral aspect of (Rt) thumb with clotted blood in and around would 4 cm x o.5 x muscle deep. 23 Circular abrassion with central contusion on upper 1/3rd of (Rt) fore arm 4 cm in diameter. 24 Oblique stab incised wound on posteriolateral aspect of (Lt) arm in lower 1/3rd region 5 cm x 2.5 cm x muscle deep directed downward and laterally with clotted blood in and around wound. 25 Oblique downward and midially directed stab incised wound on posterio medial aspect of upper 1/3rd of (Lt) arm with clotted blood in and around wound 3 cm x 1.5 cm x muscle deep. 26 Obliquely anterio posterior abrassion on medial aspect of (Lt) shoulder 6 cm x 0.5 cm. 27 Verticle stab incised wound on posterior aspect of lower 1/3rd of (Lt) forearm with clotted blood in and around wound 6 cm x 2 cm bone deep. 28 Oblique stab incised wound on lateral aspect of (Lt) 2nd metacarpophalangeal joint 2 cm x 0.5 cm x muscle deep with clotted blood in and around wound. 29 Circular abrassion with central contusion on anterior aspect of middle of 1/3rd of (Lt) arm 4 cm in diameter. 30 Oblique downward and medially directed stab incised wound on middle 1/3rd of (Lt) arm with clotted blood in and around wound 4 cm x 1.5 cm muscle deep. 31 Transverse stab incised wound on body of sternum at the level of 4th rib with clotted blood in and around 2.5 cm x bone deep. 32 Transverse abrassion on medial end of (Lt) clavical 2 cm x o.5 cm. 33 Oblique lateromedial stab incised wound on (Lt) anterior axillary line over 5th intercostal space with clotted blood in and around wound directed downward and Medically 3 cm x 1.5 cm x 5 cm. 34 Transverse stab incised wound on (Lt) 7th intercostal space on mid axillary line with clotted blood in and around wound cm x 1 cm x 4 inwardly directed. 34 Transverse stab incised wound on (Lt) 7th intercostal space on mid axillary line with clotted blood in and around wound cm x 1 cm x 4 inwardly directed. 35 Transverse stab incised wound below (Lt) costal margin on anterior axillary line with clotted blood in and around wound 3 cm x 1.5 cm x 3 cm. 36 Oblique stab incised wound on (Rt) mid axillary line at the level of 4th intercoastal space with clotted blood in and around wound 3 cm x 1.5 cm x 3 cm inwardly directed. 37 Oblique lateromedial stab incised wound on (Rt) anterior axillary line at the level of 6th intercoastal space with clotted blood in and around would 4.5 cm x 2 cm x 6 cm inwardly directed. 38 Transverse stab incised wound directed upward and medially on (Rt) mid axillary line at the level of 10th intercoastal space with clotted blood in and around wound 5 cm x 2 cm x with protruded omentum. 39 Oblique downward and Medially directed stab incised wound on upper angle of (Rt) scapula with clotted blood in and around would 4.5 cmn x 1.5 cm x 1 cm. 40 Oblique downward and Medially directed stab incised wound near the medial border of (Rt) scaula on upper part with clotted blood in and around would 3.5 cm x 1.5 cm x 2 cm. 41 Oblique stab incised wound on interscapular region with clotted blood in and around wound e cm x 1.5 cm x 2 cm. 42 Transverse stab incised wound on (Lt) scapular body 5 cm away from midline with clotted blood in and around wound 3 cm x 1.5 cm x 1 cm. 43 Transverse stab incised wound on (Rt) posterior axillary line at the level of inferior angle of scapula with clotted blood in and around would 4 cm x 2 cm x 3 cm. 44 Transverse stab wound below (Lt) scapula 5 cm away from midline with clotted blood in and around wound 1.5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep. 45 Oblique stab incised wound below scrotum on (Lt) side with clotted blood in and around 4 cm x 2 cm x 4 cm. 46 Verticle stab incised wound on medial aspect of (Rt) thigh on upper part posteriorly with clotted blood in and around wound 1.5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep. 45 Oblique stab incised wound below scrotum on (Lt) side with clotted blood in and around 4 cm x 2 cm x 4 cm. 46 Verticle stab incised wound on medial aspect of (Rt) thigh on upper part posteriorly with clotted blood in and around wound 1.5 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep. 47 Oblique downward and laterally directed stab incised wound on posterior aspect of lower 1/3rd of (Rt) thigh c clotted blood in and around wound 7 cm x 1.5 cm x muscle deep. 48 Verticle stab incised wound on lower and inferior quadrant of (Lt) gluteal region 4 cm x 1.5 cm x 7 cm c clotted blood in and around wound. 49 Verticle stab incised wound 5 cm below injury no, (48) with clotted blood in and around wound 3 cm x 1.5 cm x 7 cm. 50 Verticle stab incised wound on lateral aspect of lower 1/3rd of (Lt) thigh with clotted blood in and around wound 3 cm x 1 cm x 2 cm. 51 Verticle stab incised wound on lateral aspect of (Rt) knee with clotted blood in and around wound 7 cm x 2 cm x muscle deep. 52 Transverse stab incised wound on (Lt) patella with clotted blood in and around wound 1 cm x o.5 cm x bone deep. 7.1. The postmortem note also reveals that serious injuries were found on the chest as noted in the column no. 20, which are as under: “Stabbed on both side. Pale Oblique stab incised wound on anterolateral aspect of lower lobe of (Rt) lung with blood clotted in it 2.5 cm x 1 cm x 2 cm. (1) Oblique stab incised wound on anteriolateral aspect of middle lobe of (Lt) lung 1 cm x o.5 cm x 1 cm. (2) Transverse wound on lateral aspect of lower lobe of (Lt) lung 3 cm x 1 cm x 2 cm. Pale Empty (1) Injury noted in column no. 17, no. (9) passes through skin, S.C. tissue neck muscles and cutting (Lt) internal jugular vein and (Lt) common carotid antery. (2) On (Rt) side injury no. 12 passes through skin, S.C. tissue, neck muscles and cutting (Rt) internal jugular vein and (Rt) common carotid artery at the level of upper border of thyroid catilage. 7.2. 17, no. (9) passes through skin, S.C. tissue neck muscles and cutting (Lt) internal jugular vein and (Lt) common carotid antery. (2) On (Rt) side injury no. 12 passes through skin, S.C. tissue, neck muscles and cutting (Rt) internal jugular vein and (Rt) common carotid artery at the level of upper border of thyroid catilage. 7.2. Even the stomach as noted in column 21 are as under: “Injury No. 38 passes through skin, sub-cut, tissues, muscles and peritoneum reaching to peritoneal cavity. Abdominal cavity containing about 500 ml blood. As described in column no. 13. Containing food material Semi digested food material present faecal matter present. Transverse stab wound on (Rt) lobe of liver in inferior aspect 2 cm x o.c. cm x 1 cm. Pale Pale Pale Empty NAD As above.” 7.3. The cause of death is as under: “23. Cause of death is haemorrhagic shock due to injury to internal vital organs with vascular injuries due to multiple stab injuries.” 8. The evidence clearly shows that weapon knife was recovered from the nearby of scene of occurrence and such recovery has been duly proved by the prosecution as PW-7 Ashokbhai Chaudhari has clearly deposed in his oral deposition that the knife weapon was recovered. Considering the evidence of Dr. Yoginiben Vyas PW-13 at Exh.94 multiple injury was found on the body of the deceased can be caused by the weapon knife and therefore, contention raised by the learned advocate for the appellant that it was not regular knife and apparatus for agriculture activities does not lead to the fact that it would be improper and impossible to cause injuries on the body of the deceased by such weapon. The incident has occurred on 15.09.2012 and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has therefore, rightly contended that because of monsoon season the bloodstains might have washed out and therefore, only because in the serological report at Exh.35 and 38, the bloodstains found on the knife have remained undecided, would not go in favour of appellant accused. 9. It is no doubt true that it is case of sole eyewitness however on closure scrutiny of the deposition of the eyewitness, we find that ring of truth exist in the deposition of the witnesses. 9. It is no doubt true that it is case of sole eyewitness however on closure scrutiny of the deposition of the eyewitness, we find that ring of truth exist in the deposition of the witnesses. PW-15 Manojbhai Raval is a Rickshaw Driver as can be seen from the evidence of the other prosecution witnesses and the version of the said witnesses that he took the deceased and the appellant to Gojaria and accompanied both of them while they were having diner at lorry of PW-21 Girishbhai Patel is got supported from the version of the PW-21 Girishbhai Patel who is independent witness. The conduct of the PW-15 sole eyewitness Manojbhai Raval does not create any doubt as contended by the learned advocate for the appellant. Upon re-appreciation of evidence of PW-15 the same inspire confidence and testimony of the PW-15 gets fully corroborated with the evidence of Dr. Yogini Vyas who performed the autopsy as well as FSL report at Exh.35 and 38. 10. The version of the PW-15 the sole eyewitness also is supported by his own statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. PW-15 appeared before the learned Mamaltdar PW-16 and gave statement as provided under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which is already incorporated in para-4 of this judgment. 11. The version given by the PW-15 sole eyewitness before the Court and the statement under Section 164 is not different and the same is fully corroborated by the oral testimony of the learned Judicial Magistrate before whom such statement was recorded under Section 164 being PW-16 Hitesh Vyas at Exh.116. 12. The FSL report at Exh.35 and 38 indicates that the blood group of the deceased was found on the clothes recovered from the accused. The recovery of clothes is also supported by panchas PW-8 Ghanshyambhai Patel at Exh.71. The evidence in the form of FSL report clearly established the fact that blood group “B” which was blood ground of the deceased was found from the clothes of deceased as well as from Rexine of the Rickshaw of PW-15. The call details at Exh.174 also shows that mobile of the deceased bearing no. 9904244430 and the deceased who was possessing mobile no. 9737182877 shows the location of the same place. The call details at Exh.174 also shows that mobile of the deceased bearing no. 9904244430 and the deceased who was possessing mobile no. 9737182877 shows the location of the same place. Even considering the deposition of PW-21 at Exh.145 Girishbhai Mangaldas Patel - lorry owner, the appellant and deceased were found together in Rickshaw belonging to the PW-15 was sitting while appellant and the deceased were having their food. It is also noteworthy that PW-21 Girishbhai Patel at Exh.145 has also clearly deposed that while appellant and deceased were having food at his lorry there was dispute going on between both of them. The certificate issued by the Dr. Bhartbhai Parmar PW-12 at Exh.77 who examined appellant on 16.09.2012 shows that the injuries were found on the body of the deceased. Prosecution has thus been able to also explain the injuries upon the appellant accused as observed by the learned Sessions Judge. The fact that mobile recovered from the appellant accused and the mobile of the deceased is not in the name of the deceased, does not create any doubt about call details as even though it is in name of other persons. The evidence shows that mobile was recovered and such recovery has been proved by the prosecution. 13. Considering the deposition of PW-17 at Exh.134, it clearly established that on next day after the incident, the appellant-accused went to his lorry and purchased new cloth and it has also come on record that cloth which ware by the appellant accused at the time of committing offence were thrown by him in drainage. The said clothes have been recovered at the instance of the appellant and same has been proved by the prosecution by examining panch witnesses who have supported the case of the prosecution. 14. The aforesaid clearly proves the guilty of the appellant. Upon re-appreciation of the evidence on record, we find that prosecution has proved the guilty of the appellant accused. The version of the sole eyewitness No. 15 is trustworthy and same gets fully corroborated by the evidence of other prosecution witness. The injuries which are found on the body of the deceased as per the medical evidence on record and the evidence of Doctor can be caused by the weapon knife which has been recovered from the place of occurrence. The injuries which are found on the body of the deceased as per the medical evidence on record and the evidence of Doctor can be caused by the weapon knife which has been recovered from the place of occurrence. FSL report clearly links appellant accused, more particularly, blood found on the Rexine of the Rickshaw, we are in total agreement with the conclusion arrived at by the learned Sessions Judge and same being correct appreciation of evidence. Order of conviction is proper and same deserves to be confirmed. Resultantly appeal fails and is hereby dismissed. Record and proceedings of the case be sent back to the learned Sessions Court forthwith.