JUDGMENT : SANDEEP MEHTA, J. 1. The appellants herein have preferred the instant appeal under Section 374 (2) Cr.P.C. being aggrieved of the judgment dated 16.05.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Bhilwara, Camp Gangapur in Sessions Case No. 10/2015 whereby, they have been convicted and sentenced as below: Offence Sentences Fine Sentence in lieu of default of payment of fine Section 302 IPC Life Imprisonment Rs. 2,000/- 7 Days' Additional S.I. Section 364 IPC Ten Years' R.I. Rs. 500/- 5 Days' Additional S.I. Section 201 IPC Seven Years' S.I. Rs. 400/- 3 Days' Additional S.I. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 2. Brief facts relevant and essential for disposal of the instant appeal are noted herein-below: A decomposed dead body of an unknown woman was found near the village Devariya on 30.08.2014. Inquest proceedings (No. 12/2014) under Section 174 Cr.P.C. (Ex.P/8) came to be registered at the Police Station Raipur District Bhilwara on the same day. The police officers prepared the site inspection plan (Ex.P/12) and recovered some hair and slippers from the place of incident. Panchnama of the dead body (Ex.P/9) was prepared and it was forwarded to the Community Health Centre, Raipur for conducting postmortem. The medical jurist conducted postmortem and issued the postmortem report (Ex.P/16) as per which, the unidentified body was in an advanced stage of decomposition, due to which, the cause of death could not be ascertained. Inquiry regarding the unidentified body was continued and during the course thereof, statement (Ex.P/55) of Nathulal, the complainant of the present case was recorded wherein, he stated that he usually stayed in Karnataka where he operated an ice-cream lorry. He returned from there and was staying in his village for the last two years. His wife often complained of being haunted by spirits and thus, she used to visit the place of Kalaji Baapji, Kareda and from there, she would proceed to her parental home. On 28.08.2014, while Nathulal was proceeding towards Koshithal, his wife asked him to bring groceries on the way back. When Shri Nathulal returned, he found his house locked. He waited for a while and then, he took food with his mother and went to sleep thinking that Kamla might have gone to her aunt's house. Inferring that the absence of Kamla was usual as per past history, he did not make any effort to search for her. When Shri Nathulal returned, he found his house locked. He waited for a while and then, he took food with his mother and went to sleep thinking that Kamla might have gone to her aunt's house. Inferring that the absence of Kamla was usual as per past history, he did not make any effort to search for her. He stated that his wife always wore silver Kadiyas and never removed the same. He could not say as to what had happened to his wife. Apparently, when this statement was recorded, Shri Nathulal was not made to identify the recovered dead body's photographs. On 13.09.2014, Shri Nathulal proceeded to lodge the written report (Ex.P/1) alleging therein that when he tried to find out about the death of his wife, he came to know that she was involved in an extramarital affair with Laluram, resident of Devariya. On coming to know of this fact, the informant, accompanied by Sukhlal (PW-2) and Gopilal Balai (PW-3), went to the house of Laluram and made an enquiry on which, Laluram allegedly confessed that he had made a mistake. He and Kamla were involved in an illicit affair and that she had conceived out of these relations. She threatened Laluram to expose and implicate him for this act on which, Laluram and his friends Sonu @ Mukesh and Bablu @ Badri hatched a conspiracy to kill Smt. Kamla. She was called to the Devariya Talab on 28.08.2014. On reaching there, she was boarded on to a motorcycle (No. RJ-30-SA-6107) and was taken to the jungle and was killed. Her legs were chopped off and the Kadiyas were looted. 3. On the basis of this report, FIR No. 135/2014 (Ex.P/2) came to be registered at the Police Station Raipur for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 364 and 201 of the IPC. The file of proceedings under Section 174 Cr.P.C. were attached with the investigation file of this FIR. The accused appellant Laluram was arrested on 13.09.2014 vide arrest memo Ex.P/24. It is alleged that he gave an information (Ex.P/71) to the Investigating Officer under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and got a pair of silver Kadiyas (Ex.P/24) recovered from the shop of the jeweller Surajmal (PW-34). The accused Sonu was also arrested. The accused appellant Laluram was arrested on 13.09.2014 vide arrest memo Ex.P/24. It is alleged that he gave an information (Ex.P/71) to the Investigating Officer under Section 27 of the Evidence Act and got a pair of silver Kadiyas (Ex.P/24) recovered from the shop of the jeweller Surajmal (PW-34). The accused Sonu was also arrested. Investigation was concluded and a charge-sheet came to be filed against both the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 364 and 201 IPC. The accused Bablu was also arrested vide arrest memo Ex.P/25. However, as he was below 18 years of age, charge-sheet against him was submitted before the Juvenile Justice Board, Bhilwara. 4. At the trial, charges were framed against both the accused appellants for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 364 and 201 IPC. They pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution examined as many as 45 witnesses and exhibited 98 documents to prove its case. The accused appellants were confronted with the prosecution allegations in their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. which they denied and claimed to be innocent. Two documents were exhibited but no oral evidence was led in defence. After hearing the arguments advanced by the Public Prosecutor and the defence counsel and appreciating the evidence available on record, the learned trial court proceeded to convict and sentence the appellants as above by the impugned judgment dated 16.05.2019, which is assailed in this appeal. 5. Shri Dilip Singh, learned counsel representing the appellants, vehemently and fervently urged that the entire prosecution case is false and fabricated. No legally admissible evidence is available on the record of the case so as to connect the appellants with the alleged crime. The trial court has relied upon totally inadmissible pieces of evidence and failed to appreciate the facts in a correct perspective while convicting and sentencing the appellants as above. The impugned judgment is based on whims and fancies of the Court below and the findings recorded against the appellants are laconic and conjectural. It was contended that the first informant Nathu (PW-1), upon being examined on oath, did not utter a single word that the appellant Laluram made any extra-judicial confession in his presence. He was not made to identify the recovered clothes/ornaments of the deceased during his sworn testimony. In cross-examination, the witness admitted that he did not know the accused and he had never seen them. He was not made to identify the recovered clothes/ornaments of the deceased during his sworn testimony. In cross-examination, the witness admitted that he did not know the accused and he had never seen them. He was confronted with the portions of the FIR (A to B) regarding the so-called extra-judicial confession and he admitted that he did not make any such allegation in the report. The witness also denied that he told the police that he could identify the ornaments of his wife. Learned counsel Shri Dilip Singh also urged that two more witnesses of extra-judicial confession namely PW-2 Sukhlal and PW-3 Gopilal did not support the prosecution case and were declared hostile. Despite that and without there being any evidence, the learned trial court, held the circumstance of extra-judicial confession to be established. Shri Dilip Singh, further urged that another circumstance on the basis whereof the prosecution founded its case was the recovery of the Kadiyas of the deceased in relation whereof, the witness Shyamlal (PW-28) admitted that the Kadiyas which were sold by the accused were melted and another pair of Kadiyas were taken to the police station and were given to the SHO. Shri Dilip Singh also urged that the prosecution tried to portray a circumstance of last seen against the accused by virtue of testimony of PW-35 Gordhan Singh and PW-36 Ratan Lal. He urged that both these witnesses, were not examined by the police during investigation. They admitted in their testimony that they saw the accused in the police station and that is why they were identifying them. He further submitted that both these witnesses are closely related to the deceased and had there been any iota of truth in the evidence of the witnesses regarding they having seen the deceased being taken away by the accused then, it would be expected of them in the natural course of events that immediately after coming to know of the lady's murder, they would have approached the police or at least conveyed to Shri Nathulal that his wife had been seen going with the two accused persons. The absolute silence of both the witnesses on this aspect definitely indicates that they had not seen the deceased and the accused persons moving together. The absolute silence of both the witnesses on this aspect definitely indicates that they had not seen the deceased and the accused persons moving together. As the witnesses were never examined during investigation regarding the circumstance of last seen, it becomes abundantly clear that the evidence of the witnesses regarding this circumstance is totally cooked up. It was further submitted that the trial court also gave much importance to the call details whereas the call detail record was never proved by appropriate evidence because neither any witnesses of service provider was examined in evidence nor did the prosecution place on record, the mandatory certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act. On these grounds, learned counsel Shri Dilip Singh sought acceptance of the appeal urging that the impugned judgment deserves to be quashed and the accused persons are entitled to an acquittal. 6. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor, vehemently and fervently opposed the submissions advanced by the appellants' counsel and contended that the prosecution has proved its case against the accused appellants beyond all manner of doubt by clinching circumstantial evidence in the form of last seen, extra-judicial confession and incriminating recoveries and thus, as per him, the appellants were rightly convicted and that the impugned judgment does not suffer from any infirmity warranting interference therein. On these grounds, learned Public Prosecutor sought dismissal of the appeal and affirmation of the impugned judgment. 7. We have given our thoughtful consideration to the submissions advanced at bar and have gone through the impugned judgment and have carefully re-appreciated the evidence available on record. 8. Admittedly, there is no dispute that there is no direct/ocular testimony regarding the murder of Smt. Kamla and the conviction of the appellants is founded purely on circumstantial evidence. The circumstances on which, the Trial Court placed reliance can be enlisted herein-below: (1) Recovery of the unidentified dead body of a woman on 30.08.2014 with its legs chopped off. (2) The so-called identification of the victim by Shri Nathu (PW-1) on the basis of the clothes etc. recovered from the dead body. (3) Extra-judicial confession made by the deceased. (4) Evidence of last seen. (5) Pointing out of the place of incident by the accused persons. (6) The recovery of the silver Kadiyas of the deceased. 9. Now, we proceed to discuss the evidence of the prosecution witnesses on each of these circumstances. 10. recovered from the dead body. (3) Extra-judicial confession made by the deceased. (4) Evidence of last seen. (5) Pointing out of the place of incident by the accused persons. (6) The recovery of the silver Kadiyas of the deceased. 9. Now, we proceed to discuss the evidence of the prosecution witnesses on each of these circumstances. 10. On perusal of the evidence of Shri Nathu, we are duly satisfied that the identification of the dead body by the witness on the basis of the articles recovered therefrom and the photographs etc. is acceptable. However, if we carefully peruse the testimony of Nathu, it becomes clear that he did not utter a single word regarding the extra-judicial confession and the identification of the silver Kadiyas allegedly recovered at the instance of the accused appellant Laluram. is acceptable. However, if we carefully peruse the testimony of Nathu, it becomes clear that he did not utter a single word regarding the extra-judicial confession and the identification of the silver Kadiyas allegedly recovered at the instance of the accused appellant Laluram. For the sake of ready reference, the entire statement of Nathu (PW-1) is reproduced herein-below: djhc 7&8 eghus igys dh ckr gSA esjh iRuh dk uke deyk gSA fiNys lky 28-8-2014 dh ckr gS fd esjh iRuh deyk ?kj ls 'kke dks dkykth egkjkt djsMk tkus ds fy, fudyh Fkh okfil ugha vkbZA eSaus lkspk fd esjh iRuh mldk fi;j pkaækl tks ikl esa gh gS ogka pyh xbZ gksxhA fQj nks pkj fnu ckn irk pyk fd fdlh vkSjr dh yk'k feyh gS bl ij eSa Fkkus esa x;kA rks ogka ekywe iM+k fd yk'k lM+ xy tkus ls iqfyl us mldk iksLVekVZe fd;k o yk'k dks tyk fn;k gSA fQj iqfylokyksa us e`rd efgyk dh yk'k esa igus gq, diM+s o ukek tks xys esa igurs gS] pkch o fcNqfM;k] pwfM;ka] pIiy o dku dh ckyh fn[kkbZA rks eq>s ekywe iMk fd yk'k esjh iRuh deyk dh gSA fQj lquk fd esjh iRuh dks nsofj;k ds ykywjke us ekj dj gR;k dj nh gSA esjh iRuh o ykyw ds voS/k laca/k ls ,d xHkZ jg x;k Fkk ftlls mldh ykyw us gR;k dj nhA gR;k eksVjlkbZfdy ij ys tkdj taxy esa dhA ftldh fjiksVZ eSaus iqfyl Fkkus esa ntZ djkbZ tks ÁŒihŒ1 gksdj , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gSA pkd ,QŒvkbZŒvkjŒ ÁŒihŒ2 gS ftl ij , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gSA oDr f'kuk[rxh esjh iRuh dh pIiy] Cykmt o lkMh vkSj edku dh pkch] jkeukeh] fn[kkbZ Fkh ftls eSaus f'kuk[rx fd;kA QnZ is'kd'kh QksVks igpku i= e`rdk deyk ÁŒihŒ4 gS ftl ij , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gSA esjh iRuh esjs edku dh ryk'k dh QnZ iqfylokyksa us cukbZ tks ÁŒihŒ5 gS ftl ij , ls ch esjs gLrk{kj gSA eSa tc Fkkus esa x;k rc esjs lkFk xksihyky o lq[kyky Hkh FksA 14-05-2015 ftjg }kjk vf/koDrk eqfYte & eSa i s irk ugha fjiksVZ esa D;k fy[kk eq>s irk ugha gSA esjh iRuh dks dkSu vKkr yksx ekj x, eq>s irk ugha gSA eSa ykywjke dks ugha tkurk gwaA eSa mlls dHkh feyk Hkh ugha gwa u gh mls dHkh ns[kkA iqfyl us eq>s Fkkus ij cqykdj [kkyh dkxtksa ij gLrk{kj djk, FksA ÁŒihŒ1 esa yxk;r ÁŒihŒ5 esa D;k fy[kk gS eq>s irk ugha gSA eSa gkftj vnkyr eqfYte dks ugha igpkurk gwaA eSaus eqfYte dks dHkh ugha ns[kk gSA esjh iRuh dkykth ckoth ds vkrh tkrh jgrh gSA eSaus esjh iRuh dh gR;k ckcr~ fdlh ds f[kykQ fjiksVZ ugha nhA ÁŒihŒ1 dk , ls ch Hkkx rks eSau-----------dfM+;k fudky nh o lh ls Mh Hkkx ykywjke jsxj---------------ekj nh eSaus ugha fy[kk;k u gh ,slh dksbZ fjiksVZ Fkkus ij nhA eSaus ,sls dksbZ c;ku Hkh iqfyl dks ugha fy[kk,A iqfylokyksa us esjs ls iwNrkN dh FkhA c;ku ÁŒMhŒ1 dk , ls ch Hkkx fQj eSaus esjh---------------igpku ldrk gwaA mDr Hkkx lqudj dgk eSaus iqfyl dks ugha fy[kk;kA 11. On a perusal of the statement, it is apparent that the witness completely denied knowing the accused Lalu and also stated in his cross-examination that he did not tell the police in his statement (Ex.D/1) that he could identify the silver Kadiyas of his wife. It is also relevant to mention here that the prosecution made no attempt whatsoever to get the silver Kadiyas allegedly recovered at the instance of the accused identified from the witness when he appeared in court to depose on oath. Thus, the prosecution failed to lead credible evidence regarding the identification of the silver Kadiyas allegedly recovered at the instance of the accused. Thus, there is nothing on record to establish that the silver Kadiyas recovered at the instance of the accused Lalu had been looted from the body of Smt. Kamla after her murder. 12. The learned trial court dealt with the evidence of Nathulal at Para No. 52 of the judgment and held that the witness corroborated the extra-judicial confession. This finding of the trial court is totally perverse and amounts to misreading of the evidence because on going through the testimony of Nathu reproduced supra, it becomes clear that the witness did not utter a single word regarding the so-called extra-judicial confession by the accused in his presence. 13. In addition to Nathulal, the witnesses PW-2 Sukhlal and PW-3 Gopilal were also projected to be the witnesses of extra-judicial confession but they did not support the prosecution case and were declared hostile. Apparently thus, there is no material to support the circumstance of extra-judicial confession attributed by the prosecution to the accused Lalu and the finding recorded by the trial court, on this aspect, holding that the extra-judicial confession has been substantiated by reliable evidence is totally perverse. 14. Apparently thus, there is no material to support the circumstance of extra-judicial confession attributed by the prosecution to the accused Lalu and the finding recorded by the trial court, on this aspect, holding that the extra-judicial confession has been substantiated by reliable evidence is totally perverse. 14. The conclusions drawn by the trial court on the aspect of reliability of the evidence of Nathu are totally against the record and for demonstrating this, we are compelled to reproduce the findings recorded at Para-52 of the judgment: 52- cgl lquh i=koyh dk voyksdu fd;kA rgjhjh fjiksVZ Án'kZ ih 1 esa ÁkFkhZ ukFkw us ;g mYys[k fd;k gS fd fnukad 28-08-2014 dks mldh iRuh deyk mQZ deyh 'kke ds N% ;k lok N% cts dkyk th egkjkt djsMk tkus dh ckr dgdj xbZ Fkh] ysfdu mldh iRuh okfil ?kj ugha vkbZ rks mlus lkspk fd djsMk ds ikl mlds ihgj pkaækl pyh xbZ gksxhA blds ckn fnuakd 03-09-2014 dks mls irk yxk fd jk;iqj Fkkus ds gYds esa ,d vKkr efgyk dh yk'k iMh feyh] rks og rFkk lq[kyky cykbZ] xksih cykbZ jk;iqj Fkkus ij x;s o ekywekr dh rks Fkkus okyksa us crk;k fd vKkr efgyk dh yk'k 30-08-2014 dks feyh Fkh] tks lM xy xbZ o yk'k esa dhMs iMs+ gq, Fks] rks mUgksusa 01-09-2014 dks yk'k dk iksLVekVZe djkdj nkg laLdkj djok fn;kA ysfdu ml efgyk ds diMs lkMh] isVhdksV] Cykmt] vUMjfo;j] xys esa iguk gqvk ukek o pkch o fcNqfM;k] pwfM;k] pEiy] dku dh ,d ckyh ftudks tIr fd;k gS rFkk mlds nkfgus gkFk ij ihŒdsŒ [kqnk gqvk Fkk rFkk QksVw Hkh djk;kA Fkkus okyksa dks diMs+ fn[kkus dh dgus ij mUgksusa mDr lHkh diMs+ mls fn[kk;s o QksVw fn[kk;k tks mldh iRuh deyk ds FksA fQj mlus iRuh dh e`R;q ds ckjs esa tkudkjh dh rks irk pyk fd mldh iRuh ds ykywjke jsxj fuoklh nsofj;k ls voS/k laca/k Fks] fQj og rFkk lq[kyky o xksihyky cykbZ ykyqjke jsxj ds ?kj x;s o mlls iwNrkN dh rks ykyqjke jsxj us gkFk tksM+dj dgk fd esjs ls xyrh gks xbZ] eq>s ekQ dj nks o crk;k fd mlds o deyk ds voS/k laca/k Fks] deyk us mlls dgk fd Ms< ekg dk xHkZ jg x;k gS] vc eSa rsjk uke ywaxh vkSj rq>s QlkaÅxh rks mlus ;g ckr eqds'k o ccyw ls dgha rks rhuksa us feydj deyk dh gR;k djus dk Iyku cuk;k vkSj 28-08-2014 dks deyk dks Qksu djds cqyk;k rks deyk ogka ij vk xbZ] rks mu rhuksa us deyk dks iky ij cqykdj mldh eksVjlkbZfdy vkjts&30&,l,&6107 ij cSBkdj taxy esa ys tkdj deyk dh gR;k dj nh o rhuksa us deyk ds iSjksa dh pkanh dh dfM;ka fudky nhA ykyqjke] lksuq o ccyw us mldh iRuh dh gR;kdj lcwr feVkus dh fu;r ls taxy esa ystkdj ekj nhA vr% mDr xokg viuh iRuh ds diMs] tsojkr dks igpkurk gS o viuh iRuh ds gkFk esa ihŒdsŒ xqnk gksus ls iRuh dh igpku djrk gSA rFkk eqyfte }kjk vfrfjDr dkuwuh dk;Zokgh dh rkbZn djrk gSA vr% ,QŒvkbZŒvkj ds rF;ksa dh rkbZn djrk gSA 15. The references to evidence of Nathu which the learned trial Judge made above are totally missing from the sworn testimony of Nathu. Needless to say that the learned trial Judge quoted the FIR and then referred to it as the sworn statement of Nathu. Law is well settled that akin to a statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. an FIR is nothing but a previous statement of the maker and cannot be relied upon as a substantive piece of evidence. 16. At Para-57 of the impugned judgment, the trial court concluded that the witness Nathulal (PW-1) stated in his testimony that the accused Lalu killed his wife Smt. Kamla because she had conceived from his relations. This finding of the trial court is quoted herein-below: 57- xokg ihŒMhŒ 1 ,QŒvkbZŒvkjŒ drkZ ukFkw us vius c;kuksa esa eqyfte ykyw dk voS/k xHkZ deyk ds Bgj tkus ls eqyfte ykyw }kjk gR;k djuk vius c;kuksa esa crk;k gSA 17. On a perusal of the statement of Nathu (PW-1), it becomes clear that the evidence which the witness has given regarding his wife having conceived from the loins of the accused is based purely on hearsay because in cross-examination, he admitted that he did not know the accused Lalu. He had never met him and that he could not identify the Kadiyas of his wife. 18. In addition to the evidence of extra-judicial confession, the trial court extensively referred to the evidence of PW-35 Gordhan Singh and PW-36 Ratanlal for holding that the witnesses lastly saw the deceased in company of the accused. He had never met him and that he could not identify the Kadiyas of his wife. 18. In addition to the evidence of extra-judicial confession, the trial court extensively referred to the evidence of PW-35 Gordhan Singh and PW-36 Ratanlal for holding that the witnesses lastly saw the deceased in company of the accused. The conclusion drawn by the trial court at Para-58 of the impugned judgment after appreciating the evidence of PW-35 Gordhan Singh and PW-36 Ratanlal is reproduced herein-below for the sake of ready reference: 58- xokg ihŒMhŒ 35 xksj/ku flag tks fd egRoiw.kZ xokg gS] ftlus fd e`rdk deyk dks vafre ckj eqyfteku ds lkFk ns[kkA vr% mDr xokg ykLV lhu ,foMsaUl ckcr lk{; nsrk gS rFkk vius eq[; ijh{k.k esa dFku djrk gS fd vius c;ku ls djhc 2 lky igys dh ckr crkbZ fd tks fd c;ku 15-09-2016 dks fn;s x;s] fd 'kke ds djhc lk<+s lkr cts nsofj;k rkykc dh iky ds ikl gekjs lekt dh deyk iRuh ukFkw cykbZ fuoklh ekyh [ksMk utj vkbZ] ftlds lkFk dqy 3 vkneh Fks] ftuesa nks cMs o ,d NksVk yMdk FkkA rFkk vkxs dFku fd;k fd deyk ds lkFk ml fnu tks vkneh Fks] mudks lkeus vkus ij eSa igpku ldrk gwaA xokg us U;k;ky; esa ekStwn nksuksa vfHk;qDrx.k dks ns[kdj dgk fd ;s nksuksa O;fDr oks gh gS] tks ml fnu deyk ds lkFk FksA ftjg esa lkjHkwr fojks/kkHkklh dFku ugha fd;k gSA vr% vfHk;kstu ds rF;ksa dh rkbZn dh gSA mDr xokg ds c;ku ds lUnHkZ esa eqyfteku us viuh Áfrj{kk esa dksbZ lk{; ÁLrqr ugha dh gS] ftlls bl ckr dks cy feyrk gS fd eqyfteku ykyw o eqds'k us gh deyk dh gR;k dh gSA blh Ádkj xokg ihŒMhŒ 36 jruyky us vius c;kuks esa deyk ds lkFk gkftj vnkyr eqyfteku dks ns[kuk crk;k gSA ftjg esa lkjHkwr fojks/kkHkklh dFku ugha fd;k gS] vr% vfHk;kstu ds rF;ksa dh rkbZn dh gSA 19. If we carefully peruse the statements of Gordhan Singh (PW-35) and Ratanlal (PW-36), it would become clear that this conclusion of the trial court is also laconic on the face of record. PW-35 Gordhan Singh stated in his evidence that two years ago, he was proceeding from Devariya to Gangapur. In the evening, at about 7:30, he saw Kamla, W/o Nathu Lal with three men of which two were elderly and one was a boy. PW-35 Gordhan Singh stated in his evidence that two years ago, he was proceeding from Devariya to Gangapur. In the evening, at about 7:30, he saw Kamla, W/o Nathu Lal with three men of which two were elderly and one was a boy. He did not know these people. He returned to his home. Three days later, he heard that a girl from his community had been killed but he was not sure about the identity of the deceased. He could identify the people who were with Kamla. The witness looked at the accused present in the Court and stated that these were the two persons who were present with Kamla. In cross-examination, the witness admitted that he did not give any statement to the police. Kamla was his cousin. He had seen the accused in the police station and that is why, he was identifying them. He did not see them at the spot. 20. The witness Ratanlal, while deposing on oath as PW-36 stated that he along with Gordhanlal were coming to Gangapur from Jhadol Mataji. In the evening, at about 7:30-7:45, he saw Kamla, W/o Nathu Lal with three men near Devariya talab. Since they both were in hurry, they did not stop and proceeded ahead. Later on, he heard that someone had murdered the girl and the dead body was thrown into an agricultural field. The witness looked at the accused present in the Court and stated that these are the two persons who were present with Kamla. In cross-examination, the witness admitted that he had seen the accused in the police station. He further stated that Kamla belonged to his community and that is why, he knew her. 21. At Para No. 55 of the impugned judgment, the trial court made extensive reference to the informations provided by the accused to the Investigating Officer regarding identifying the place of incident and the identification thereof vide memos Ex.P/22 and Ex.P/23. Suffice it to say that this exercise of identification of place of incident is absolutely irrelevant because nothing incriminating was recovered from the places allegedly pointed out by the accused. 22. Clearly thus, the learned trial Judge completely eschewed the cross-examination conducted from both the witness from consideration while recording the finding on the last seen circumstance at Para 58 of the impugned judgment. 22. Clearly thus, the learned trial Judge completely eschewed the cross-examination conducted from both the witness from consideration while recording the finding on the last seen circumstance at Para 58 of the impugned judgment. The findings so recorded by the trial court that the appellants and the deceased were lastly seen in company of each other is totally perverse on the face of record. We therefore have no hesitation in holding that the circumstances of last seen and extra-judicial confession have not been proved by the prosecution by leading reliable evidence. 23. The Investigating Officer claims to have recovered the weapon of offence (axe) (Ex.P/20) at the instance of the juvenile in conflict with law-Sonu and the blood stained clothes of both the accused (Ex.P/36 and Ex.P/39). The clothes of the accused and the clothes of the victim were found to be stained with ‘AB’ group blood. However, the recoveries are totally unbelievable. It is admitted position that Smt. Kamla went missing on 28.08.2014. The FIR came to be filed as late as on 13.09.2014. In this interval of almost 15 days, the accused were free-birds and had ample opportunity to destroy the worthless blood stained clothes. It is impossible to believe that the accused would preserve these worthless articles and give an opportunity to the police to recover the same, later on to be used as incriminating pieces of evidence against themselves. Therefore, the recoveries of the blood stained clothes of the accused made as late as on 15.09.2014 do not inspire confidence and hence, the FSL report (Ex.P/94) loses significance. 24. The trial court also placed reliance on the call detail records but suffice it to say that no witness of the prosecution mentioned the number of the mobile phone allegedly in use of the deceased Smt. Kamla. Furthermore, the call detail records were not proved in accordance with law because certificate under Section 65-B of the Evidence Act, mandatorily required to prove the call detail records, was not tendered in evidence during the testimony of the prosecution witnesses. 25. After having discarded all these circumstances, the only evidence which remains on record of the case so as to give a semblance of link between the accused and the alleged murder would be in form of the recoveries of the Kadiyas allegedly to be that of the deceased. 25. After having discarded all these circumstances, the only evidence which remains on record of the case so as to give a semblance of link between the accused and the alleged murder would be in form of the recoveries of the Kadiyas allegedly to be that of the deceased. For the sake of repetition, it may be reiterated that the prosecution made no attempt whatsoever to get these Kadiyas identified during the sworn testimony of the complainant Nathu (PW-1). The Kadiyas were allegedly recovered by SHO Shri Bhajjuuram (PW-44) at the instance of the accused Lalu vide memorandum (Ex.P/24). This recovery was effected from the shop of Basant Kumar Soni (PW-25). The Investigating Officer also proved the document (Ex.P/31) whereby, the accused sold the Kadiyas in the shop of Basant Kumar. The information leading to the recovery was proved as Ex.P/71. If we peruse the testimony of Basant Kumar (PW-25), it becomes clear that he gave evidence regarding the accused Lalu having sold the Kadiyas to him and the recovery thereof by the police vide memo Ex.P/24. However, the recovery loses significance when we peruse the testimony of Shyamlal (PW-28), uncle of Basant Kumar who admitted in his cross-examination that he and Basant Kumar took the Kadiyas to the police station. Basant Kumar had melted the original Kaidyas and gave another set of Kadiyas to the police. The recovered Kadiyas, on which much reliance was placed by the trial court, were not exhibited by the prosecution in the evidence of PW-1 Nathulal, PW-25 Basant Kumar and PW-28 Shyam Lal. The first attempt made by the prosecution to get these Kadiyas shown in the Court was during evidence of PW-44, the Investigating Officer Shri Bhajjuram. However, it cannot be denied that the Kadiyas should have been produced, exhibited and identified in the testimony of Nathulal, if at all the prosecution was desirous of proving that the deceased was wearing these ornaments at the time she was murdered. The failure of the prosecution to make any such endeavour makes it clear beyond doubt that the prosecution failed to prove that the recovered Kadiyas (Article Ex.P/24), had been looted from the body of the victim. 26. As a consequence, we have no hesitation in holding that the prosecution miserably failed to prove any of the incriminating circumstances so as to link the accused with the murder of Smt. Kamla. 26. As a consequence, we have no hesitation in holding that the prosecution miserably failed to prove any of the incriminating circumstances so as to link the accused with the murder of Smt. Kamla. The trial Judge misquoted the facts and misread the evidence while recording the adverse findings against the accused. The impugned judgment is, on the face of record perverse, conjectural and laconic and cannot be sustained because the prosecution failed to prove even a single of the so-called incriminating circumstances relied upon for proving guilt of the accused in this case. Consequently, the accused appellants are entitled to acquittal by giving them benefit of doubt. Hence, the impugned judgment dated 16.05.2019 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Camp Bhilwara in Sessions Case No. 10/2015 is set aside. The appellants are acquitted of the charges. They are in custody and shall be released from prison forthwith, if not wanted in any other case. 27. The appeal is allowed in these terms. 28. However, keeping in view the provisions of Section 437-A Cr.P.C. the accused appellants are directed to furnish a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- each and a surety bond in the like amount before the learned trial court, which shall be effective for a period of six months to the effect that in the event of filing of a Special Leave Petition against the present judgment on receipt of notice thereof, the appellant shall appear before the Supreme Court. 29. Record be returned to the trial court forthwith.