JUDGMENT : (Goutam Bhaduri, J.) 1. All the appeals are being heard together, as the common thread passes through the issue. 2. The present appeals are arising out of judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23-3-2021 passed by the Special Judge {Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act}, Kabeerdham, in Atrocity Spl. Criminal Case No.99/2018 whereby the learned Court below convicted the appellants for offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month. However, acquitted the appellants from the charge under Section 3(2)(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) (Amendment) Act, 2015. 3. (i) The prosecution case, as emerging from the material on record, is that when on 3-10-2018 the deceased Lekhram was at his home, at about 10.30 pm he received 2-3 calls on his mobile. The deceased thereafter went out with a Jerry Can to bring diesel. His wife Phoolbasan (PW-3) went to sleep. Subsequently, when he did not return till next day morning, Phoolbasan and her brother in law Shatruhan started searching and tried to call him, but his mobile was responding as switched off. Thereafter, Shatruhan (PW-4) went for searching the deceased and on the way one person namely; Radheshyam informed him that in between Gangapur and Padi the dead body was lying. Having gone there and identified the dead body that it was of deceased Lekhram, a report was made by Phoolbasan (PW-3), wife of the deceased, on 4-10-2018. The report having been made, merg was recorded vide Ex.P/5 and subsequently the FIR was registered vide Ex.P/6. The dead body was subjected to postmortem. The postmortem was conducted by Dr.Belchandan (PW-11) and report thereof was given vide Ex.P/26. During investigation by Bharat Bareth (PW- 10), from the place of incident, the motorcycle, slippers, scarf, bloodstained and plain soil was seized vide Ex.P/3. (ii) Subsequently, on 5-10-2018 the accused persons were apprehended and their memorandum statements were recorded vide Ex.P/17 to Ex.P/20. The postmortem was conducted by Dr.Belchandan (PW-11) and report thereof was given vide Ex.P/26. During investigation by Bharat Bareth (PW- 10), from the place of incident, the motorcycle, slippers, scarf, bloodstained and plain soil was seized vide Ex.P/3. (ii) Subsequently, on 5-10-2018 the accused persons were apprehended and their memorandum statements were recorded vide Ex.P/17 to Ex.P/20. Pursuant to the memorandum, the following articles were recovered at the instance of different accused - (i) knife, plastic Jerry Can, mobile, cash of Rs.900/- and T-Shirt were recovered at the behest of Manish Sakat (A/1) vide Ex.P/21; (ii) Bamboo stick, mobile, motorcycle, T-Shirt and half pant were recovered at the behest of Shankar Chandravasnshi (A/2) vide Ex.P/22; (iii) Bamboo stick, T-shirt, full pant and mobile were recovered at the behest of Komal Chandravanshi (A/3) vide Ex.P/23 and (iv) At the instance of Durga Chandravanshi (A/4), Baniyan, half pant, scarf, club and motorcycle were recovered vide Ex.P/24. The mobile of the deceased was searched and Talashi panchnama was prepared vide Ex.P/25. Thereafter, the statements of Phoolbasan (PW-3) and Shatruhan (PW-4) were recorded. The alleged weapon used for commission of crime was sent for query report and having received the report, it was sent for FSL report by Narendra Kumar Bental (PW-14). The FSL report was received vide Ex.P/36. Thereafter, phone call details was obtained, which was filed with a certificate under Section 65B of the Evidence Act. After preparation of the site plan and recording the statements of witnesses, the charge sheet was filed. 4. During the course of trial, all the accused persons abjured their guilt and pleaded innocence. On behalf of the prosecution as many as 14 witnesses were examined. No witness was examined on behalf of the defence. The learned trial Court after evaluating the evidence, convicted and sentenced the accused persons as aforementioned. Hence, these appeals. 5. 4. During the course of trial, all the accused persons abjured their guilt and pleaded innocence. On behalf of the prosecution as many as 14 witnesses were examined. No witness was examined on behalf of the defence. The learned trial Court after evaluating the evidence, convicted and sentenced the accused persons as aforementioned. Hence, these appeals. 5. Shri Rajeev Shrivastava, learned senior counsel assisted by Shri Malay Shrivastava, Shri Saurabh Sahu & Ms Anu Mishra, Advocates for the appellants in CRA Nos.478 of 2021 & 480 of 2021 (A/2 to A/4) would submit that : - the FIR was registered against the unknown persons and the entire case of the prosecution was based on circumstantial evidence; - referring to the statement of Phoolbasan (PW-3), learned counsel would submit that according to her, the deceased received the phone call and the caller was not identified, therefore, it cannot be stated that one of the accused had called; - learned counsel would further submit that there are ‘n’ number of circumstances which were against the deceased qua enmity in the village, as allegation of theft of diesel was on the deceased; - learned counsel would also submit that because of certain land dispute was going on between the family members of the accused and the deceased and on account of the same, the accused persons have been falsely implicated in the case at hand; - according to the learned senior counsel, Shatruhan (PW-4), who is the brother of the deceased, would be a relative/interested witness and the land dispute is going on between the family members which had further aggravated. Referring to his statement, learned counsel would submit that the land dispute was with Hiralal, which led to filing of different police reports and, as such, the appellants cannot be implicated in the present case; - he would submit that the accused persons have been inculpated on presumption on the basis of different phone calls made between A/1 & A/2; - he would also submit that simply there had been certain phone calls in between the deceased and some of the accused it cannot lead to presence of accused at the place where the incident occurred; - referring to statement of PW-9 Sanjiv Nema, learned counsel would submit that in order to establish the location the prosecution should have placed the tower location; - he would further submit that how the accused were subjected to suspicion has not been established by the prosecution; - to buttress his contention, learned counsel would place reliance upon the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Baiju Kumar Soni and Another v State of Jharkhand, (2019) 7 SCC 773 ; - he would submit that only on the basis of circumstantial evidence the accused have been inculpated and in support of his contention, learned counsel would place reliance upon the decisions rendered by the Supreme Court in the matter of Sattatiya alias Satish Rajanna Kartalla v State of Maharashtra, (2008) 3 SCC 210 and Prakash v State of Karnataka, (2014) 12 SCC 133 ; - learned counsel would submit that the FSL report on which primarily the trial Court has relied and convicted the accused, it is not established by the prosecution as to which accused the said blood group belongs. He would submit that there can be numerous people of the same blood group and unless the chain is established, the serological report cannot be safely relied upon coupled with the fact that the seizure witnesses of the blood stained clothes of deceased namely; Arvind Shukla and Somendra Sharma were not examined, which is a serious lacuna, though the seizure was made from Ajay Chandravanshi (PW-8); - learned counsel would submit that the alleged bloodstained clothes were seized on 4-10-2018 & 5-10- 2018 but it was sent for serology report on 18-10-2018 and no register of malkhana was produced which also raises a serious doubt of false implication of the accused in the case at hand; - learned counsel would submit that non-examination of seizure wittiness would a be serious flaw. He placed reliance upon the decision rendered in the matter of Pratap Singh and Another v State of M.P., (2005) 13 SCC 624 ; and - he would submit that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond the reasonable doubt and also failed to complete the chain of circumstances and hence the impugned conviction is bad in law. 6. While adopting the arguments advanced by learned senior counsel appearing for A/2 to A/4, Shri Animesh Verma, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in CRA No.633 of 2021 (A/1), would submit that:- -A/1 is inculpated in the crime on the basis of phone call and the seizure of knife. The size of knife, which was seized at the instance of the accused, is contradictory. Article ‘D’, which was seized, does not disclose the size of knife whereas PW-11 Dr. The size of knife, which was seized at the instance of the accused, is contradictory. Article ‘D’, which was seized, does not disclose the size of knife whereas PW-11 Dr. Belchandan examined the knife specifically stated that the size of knife was 22.5 cm, which makes it to 8 inches, whereas the knife which was seized was of 21 inches; - referring to statement of PW-12 Jhadu Ram Kurre, learned counsel would submit that this witness has improved the statement that Phoolbasan (PW-3) informed him that A/1 had called the deceased over phone whereas Phoolbasan (PW-3) never disclosed this fact, therefore, the false implication started from day one; - learned counsel would further submit that the seizure of mobile of the deceased could not be made, therefore, the doubt which was crept into the mind of the police where from the mobile was recovered has not been made clear; - referring to the statement of two seizure witnesses namely; Jhadu Ram Kurre (PW-12) and Gendu Ram (PW-13), learned counsel would submit that two contradictory statements have been made. One has said that the police had taken out the knife whereas the other witness said that A/1 went into the house and came with knife, therefore, if the knife was implanted at the instance of prosecution to inculpate the appellant, it cannot be ruled out; - learned counsel would submit that the deceased used to go for getting the stolen diesel in the night that may be one of the reason for enmity with some one; - learned counsel would next submit that PW-8 Ajay Chandravanshi received the clothes of the deceased on 4-10-2018 from the Doctor, but seizure was shown on 20-10-2018, therefore, the gap of 15 days has not been explained by the prosecution; and - learned counsel would submit that from the accused bloodstained T-shirt was said to be seized but PW-12 Jhadu Ram Kurre stated that at 8.45 pm after notice received from police he went to police station whereas PW-13 Gendu Ram has stated that at 10.00 am the police came, so the first information of the incident was at 10.00 am not before that. This also creates doubt. In fact, the chain of circumstances having not been completed, the accused is liable to be acquitted. 7. This also creates doubt. In fact, the chain of circumstances having not been completed, the accused is liable to be acquitted. 7. Shri Arjit Tiwari, learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the State, while supporting the impugned judgment would submit that the date of incident was on 3-10-2018 and the statement of the wife of the deceased was recorded immediately on the next day i.e. 4-10- 2018 wherein the doubt was raised over Komal, Durga & Shankar. He would further submit that when the statements of Phoolbasan (PW-3), Shatruhan (PW-4) and Rajkumar Tandan (PW-5) are read together, it would show that there was some land dispute between the deceased and the accused and they have jointly extended in unequivocal voice that they (deceased party) may win in the Court, but not from them (accused party), therefore, the motive of old animosity was established by the prosecution. He would also submit that phone call made at the relevant time has also been provided by PW-9 Sanjiv Nema that A/1 called the deceased and thereafter, number of conversations took place in between A/1 & A/2 and after they were apprehended, on their memorandum from A/2 & A/3 bamboo stick was recovered; from A/4 babool stick was recovered; and from A/1 knife was recovered. The query which was sent is proved by Dr. Belchandan (PW-11) that there were as many as 16 injuries and reasons were attributed that those injuries could have been inflicted by the weapon used. Learned counsel would next submit that bloodstained and plain soil were collected from the spot. Apart from that, FSL report has also proved the presence of blood. Therefore, the conviction is well merited, which do not call for any interference. 8. Shri Basant Dewangan & Shri Krishna Tandon, learned counsel appearing for the objector would adopt the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the State. 9. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties at length and perused the record. 10. Four of the appellants were convicted with an allegation that they have committed murder of Lekhram. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt, started with the statement of P.W.3 Phoolbasan Bai, wife of deceased. 9. We have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties at length and perused the record. 10. Four of the appellants were convicted with an allegation that they have committed murder of Lekhram. The prosecution in order to prove the guilt, started with the statement of P.W.3 Phoolbasan Bai, wife of deceased. She stated that on 03.10.2018 her husband came back to home at about 8 p.m. After having food, the deceased received a call on mobile and after attending the call, the husband left the house saying that he is going to buy diesel then she went to sleep. When she woke up in the next morning, she found her husband has not yet returned. Then she went to her brother-in-law Satruhan and one relative to say that Lekhram had not come back to home. It was stated by her that last night when someone called him on phone, Lekhram left the house saying he was going to buy diesel. Thereafter they made call to Lekhram’s mobile phone several times, but her husband’s mobile phone was responding as switched off. Then she and her brother in law went to Padhi road to find Lekhram and on the way they met one Radhe who told them that a man was lying dead on Gangapur- Padhi road. Then her brother in law Shatruhan and one Rajkumar went to see the dead-body and subsequently half-an-hour later, she was informed by Shatruhan that Lekhram had been murdered, whose body was lying on the Gangpur-Padhi Road. 11. P.W.3, the wife of deceased in her statement u/s 161 CrP.C., has raised doubt on Komal Chandrawanshi and others as some dispute was going on, as such, the threat was extended by family of Komal Chandrawanshi (A-1), to commit murder. Similar statement has been made before the Court that because of enmity the accused have killed her husband. She has further stated that her husband and Shatruhan and others had purchased agricultural land from Shankar Jaiswal. Her husband and Shatruhan together had bought 10 acres of land and after purchasing the land, the names of her husband and brother-in-law got mutated in records and then they started tilling the land. She has stated in her evidence that accused Komal and his family members used to forcibly cut away their crop which was reported by her husband to the police. She has stated in her evidence that accused Komal and his family members used to forcibly cut away their crop which was reported by her husband to the police. She has categorically stated that a case was also brought against accused Komal, Durga and Shankar in the Court and the deceased party had won that case and having won the case, in response the accused Komal, Durga and Shankar had threatened her husband Lekhram that “you can win from the Court, but you cannot win over them and we will kill you”. Thus she has deposed that the old enmity is the cause of motive to kill her husband. 12. Similar statement is made by P.W.5 Raj Kumar Tandon. Though he was declared hostile but in the cross examination, at para 4 he admits the fact that land dispute was going on between the accused party and deceased party for the last 5 to 6 years. He further admits that there was a dispute over the land which was purchased by Lekhram (deceased) and his brother Shatruhan from Shankar Jaiswal and they got possession. He also admits that from disputed land, accused Komal, Durga and Shankar used to take away the crop sown by deceased Lekhram and Shatruhan. At para 5, this witness further admits that deceased Lekhram and and Shatruhan filed a case in revenue court against accused Komal, Durga and Shankar regarding the land dispute in which Lekhram and Shatruhan won the case and after winning the court battle, threat was extended by Komal (A-3), Durga (A-4) and Shankar (A-2) that they would kill Lekhram and Shatruhan. P.W.7 Radhelal who saw the dead body has also said about some enmity with the accused over a land dispute. 13. According to prosecution, before the incident, all the accusedappellants at the relevant time had called each other. In order to prove such conversations, the prosecution has examined P.W.9 who is nodal officer of the Telecom company. According to him, SIM No. 87701 47086 was of the deceased. The SIM No.6264321411 was allotted to Manish Kumar Sakat (A-1) and SIM No.7000269572 was allotted to Shankarlal Chandrawanshi (A-2), s/o Komal Chandrawanshi. As per his statement on 03.10.2018 at 20:43:56 hours (night), Manish called Lekhram. Thereafter at 21:16:45 hours again a call was made by Manish Kumar to deceased. According to him, SIM No. 87701 47086 was of the deceased. The SIM No.6264321411 was allotted to Manish Kumar Sakat (A-1) and SIM No.7000269572 was allotted to Shankarlal Chandrawanshi (A-2), s/o Komal Chandrawanshi. As per his statement on 03.10.2018 at 20:43:56 hours (night), Manish called Lekhram. Thereafter at 21:16:45 hours again a call was made by Manish Kumar to deceased. Later at the same time, return call was made at 21:23:30 hours by deceased to Manish. After 11 minutes again, Manish made call to deceased at 21.34.21 hours. It is further stated that on same day morning, Manish received a phone call at 10:34:10 hours made from Shankar Chandrawanshi. Again Manish received a phone call on the same day at 12:01:38 hours (p.m). Thereafter a phone call was made by Shankar Chandrawanshi in the night on 21:46:10 hours to Manish (A-1). 14. Further this witness (P.W.9) deposed that in the night at 22:01:51, 22:02:52 & 22:7:29 hours Shankar Chandrawanshi made calls to Manish Sakat. Thereafter at 22:14:01 hours Manish called Shankar Chandrawanshi. Thereafter at 22:14:50 hours Shankar Chandrawanshi called Manish. Later in the same night at 22:28:49, 22:30:38, 22:35:37 hours and 22:37:30, 22:39:47, 22:40:45 hours Shankar Chandrawanshi called Manish. Again, on 03-10-2018 at 22:41.55 hours Manish called Shankar Chandrawanshi. In the same night at 22:43:09, 22:46:23 and 22:47:51 hours, Shankar Chandrawanshi again called Manish and later on at 22:48:57 hours Manish called Shankar Chandrawanshi and on subsequent date in the morning i.e., 04.10.2018 at 08:20:29 a.m., Manish called Shankar Chandrawanshi. The said call details have been proved by Ex.P-15 and also accompanied by a certificate u/s 65 B-4 (C) of the Indian Evidence Act. Therefore, the presumption of call made in between Shankar Chandrawanshi and Manish and the deceased was established. 15. The cross examination of the witness would show that the tower location of calls of both the accused and that of deceased has not been shown. According to the statement and Telephone records, the deceased had only talked with Manish. What was place of call, the prosecution has failed to prove. The Talashi Panchnama of the deceased which is marked as Ex.P-25 shows that at the behest of Manish Kumar, search was made in a field of phone of the deceased, but it was not found. According to the statement and Telephone records, the deceased had only talked with Manish. What was place of call, the prosecution has failed to prove. The Talashi Panchnama of the deceased which is marked as Ex.P-25 shows that at the behest of Manish Kumar, search was made in a field of phone of the deceased, but it was not found. Though the I.O., has stated that because of conversation, the doubt was raised on the accused despite the phone of deceased was not recovered but the conversation between Manish and deceased is not eliminated. Statement of P.W.9 who affirms the fact that certain phone numbers were in hold of two of the accused and the deceased has not been rebutted and has not been denied by the accused. The said set of evidence only raises a doubt and even if the conversations are admitted to have taken place between the accused and deceased and between two of the accused, presumption to commit crime cannot be arrived at except some suspicion. But such suspicion cannot replace the evidence to make it conclusive. 16. According to the prosecution, after the accused were apprehended their memorandum was recorded. Memorandum of Manish Kumar (A-1) is Ex.P.17. As per such memorandum statement of accused Shankar, Komal, Durga assaulted Lekhram with a club and when he fell down on the ground, he cut his throat by a knife. The knife was recovered by Ex.P-21. The knife was of 21” and the blade was 11” and the handle was of 10”. When the knife was recovered, blood stains like were found. Apart from it, one Plastic Can of 30 litres, which was said to be carried out by the deceased and one Mobile, cash of Rs.900/-, a T-Shirt with blood stains were recovered. The said articles were seized on 05.10.2018. 17. The memorandum of Shankar Chandrawashi (Ex.P-18) shows that one Bamboo stick of 132” having 6 knots/rings with blood mark were recovered. Apart from it, the motor cycle, mobile and TShirt with blood stains were seized which was sealed vide Ex.P- 22. 18. Another memorandum of Komal Chandrawanshi was recorded by Ex.P-19 and the seizure was made by Ex.P-23 and from his possession, Scarf, shirt with blood stains, a full pant with blood stains, a bamboo club of 152” with 7 knots/rings having blood stains and a mobile was recovered which were sealed on 05.10.2018. 19. 18. Another memorandum of Komal Chandrawanshi was recorded by Ex.P-19 and the seizure was made by Ex.P-23 and from his possession, Scarf, shirt with blood stains, a full pant with blood stains, a bamboo club of 152” with 7 knots/rings having blood stains and a mobile was recovered which were sealed on 05.10.2018. 19. The memorandum of Durga was recorded by Ex.P-20 and the property seizure memo was marked as Ex.P-24. From him, one red coloured banian, one Chaddaa (underwear) having a blood like stain, One Gamcha (towel) having blood like stains, Babool Club of 136” and one T-Shirt having bloodstains like were recovered which was seized on 05.10.2018. 20. The said bamboo sticks/lathi and knife were sent with a query as to whether the same could cause the injury to the deceased vide Ex.P-27). The query report of the Doctor would show that on examination, he gave opinion that injury could be caused from those seized weapons i.e., club and knife. Thereafter, it was sealed and returned to the police constable. The postmortem report is filed as E.P-26 and the same was proved by Doctor (P.W.11). According to the doctor, the following injuries were found : S.No. Description of Injury 1 A chop wound in front of neck measuring 10x4x4 cms. The said injury was from the part of throat below the right ear to the other side of the throat (left side). The blood vessels and windpipe were cut in the said injury and blood and blood cots were present inside the injury. 2. On the right side of the forehead, the bone was fractured at the site of the said injury with lacerated wound in the front. The size of the said injury was 9x6x2cm. 3. An incised wound in size of 1x0.5x0.5 cm on the right side of the lower lip. 4. A cut wound in size of 2 x 1 x 0.5 cm on the right side of the upper lip where the bone was fractured. 5. A lacerated wound of size 8x2.5 x bone deep. 6. A lacerated wound admeasuring 7x3xbone deep in the upper left side of the head 7. A lacerated wound in size of 6x2x bone deep on the left side of the head. 8. An incised wound of 6 x 2 x bone deep in the middle of upper part of the head 9. 6. A lacerated wound admeasuring 7x3xbone deep in the upper left side of the head 7. A lacerated wound in size of 6x2x bone deep on the left side of the head. 8. An incised wound of 6 x 2 x bone deep in the middle of upper part of the head 9. A lacerated wound on the right side of of the head measuring 4 x 2 x bone deep. 10. Swelling in the right side of the abdomen measuring 22 x 2 cm. 11. Shaved wound (swelling) in size of 9 x 2 cm in the front of the left shoulder. 12. Two shaved wounds (swelling) on the right side of the back measuring 9x 2 cm and 18x2 cm respectively 13. Two bald spots (swelling) on the upper part of the right shoulder in size of 8 x 5 cm and 9 x 5 cm respectively. 14. Lower part of the right hand and the elbow joint were broken. 15. The bone of the right hand was broken and there was swelling. 16. The bone of the upper part of left hand was broken and there was swelling. On internal examination, the doctor has further found that the block of the brain was ruptured and the inner part of the brain was visible. Throat and wind-pipe were cut. Lung and large blood vessel were congested. The left chamber of the heart was empty and the right chamber was filled with blood. 21. According to Doctor, a full pant and T-Shirt of deceased having blood stains were sealed and handed over to the Police and cause of death was coma due to injury on head and neck, which resulted in coma and the death was homicidal in nature. The death was caused in duration of 12 to 24 hours prior to the postmortem. According to the I.O. (P.W.10) on 05.10.2018 when the accused were taken into custody, different recoveries were made. 22. The Doctor further states that on 28.10.2018, the T-Shirt, scarf, full shirt, nicker and scarf which were in sealed condition were sent to him and query was sought whether human blood is present on those or not, which was sent by P.W.14 the SDO(P) and the query report was sent by Doctor vide Ex.P-28 to the SDO (P) to send them for FSL. Likewise, on 3.12.2018, according to P.W.11, the SDO(P) sent scarf in sealed condition to know whether such scarf contains human blood or not ? The Doctor sent it in a sealed condition to the SDOP to send it for chemical examination. The same was sent by Ex.P-29. According to the Doctor, the size of knife tested by him was 22.5 cms. The front part of knife was blunt and second part of knife contains sharp teeth like edges and the holder of knife and the sharp edged teeth was having blood. On the advice of doctor, the said seized articles were sent by the SDOP (P.W.14) to Raipur to obtain the FSL report. The said memorandum dated 04.12.2018 was marked as Ex.P-34. The articles were deposited with the FSL on 05.12.2018 by Ex.P-35 and thereafter the FSL report was received on 11.01.2019 by Ex. 36. 23. According to FSL report, article P-1 and P-2 i.e., full pant and T-Shirt were that of deceased Lekhram. On Article P-1 the full pant, blood group ‘B’ which was of the deceased was found. However, in respect of Article P-2, T-Shirt since the sample was not received as such the blood group was not ascertained, however, presence of human blood was certified. (ii) In respect of Article D, the knife which was seized from Manish Kumar, blood group of “B” was found to be present. In the T-Shirt of Manish Kumar that was Article E, blood was said to be disintegrated. (iii) In respect of Shankar Chandravanshi, the club was marked as article “F”. Though the blood was found, but it was disintegrated as such no definite opinion was given. In respect of Nicker of Shankar Chandrawanshi which was marked as “G”, only blood was found to be present and whether it was human or other blood was not ascertained as it was disintegrated. However, in respect of T-Shirt which was marked as H, the human blood of group B was found to be present. (iv) In respect of accused Komal Chandrawanshi, human blood was found to be present on club (Danda) seized from him, which was marked as Article- “I” and in respect of Article “J” which was of full shirt seized from Komal Chandrawanshi, human blood was found to be present. Likewise, on his full pant which was marked as “K”, only blood was found to be present. Likewise, on his full pant which was marked as “K”, only blood was found to be present. (v) In respect of accused Durga Chandravanshi, on the banian marked as article ‘L’, human blood of B group was found to be present and the Nicker ‘M’ likewise human blood of B group was present. On the scarf (Gamcha) which was marked as ‘N’ only presence of blood was found and on the club (Danda) marked as article ‘O’, human-blood was found to be present. 24. Since there is no eye witness to this case and the case was completely based on circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstances are required to be established. The Supreme Court in Sattatiya alias Satish Rajanna Kartala Vs. State of Maharashtra (2008) 3v SCC 210 has reiterated the law laid down at paras 12,13 & 14 which are reproduced hereunder : 12. In Padala Veera Reddy v. State of A.P. 1989 Supp (2) SCC 706, this Court held that when a case rests upon circumstantial evidence, the following tests must be satisfied : (1) the circumstances from which an inference of guilt is sought to be drawn, must be cogently and firmly established; (2) those circumstances should be of a definite tendency unerringly pointing towards guilt of the accused; (3) the circumstances, taken cumulatively, should form a chain so as to complete that there is no escape from the conclusion that within all human probability the crime was committed by the accused and noneelse; and (4) the circumstantial evidence in order to sustain conviction must be complete and incapable of explanation of any other hypothesis than that of the guilt of the accused and such evidence should not only be consistent with the guilt of the accused but should be inconsistent with his innocence.” 13. In Sharad Birdhichand Sarda vs. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116 , it was held that the onus was on the prosecution to prove that the chain is complete and falsity or untenability of the defence set up by the accused cannot be made basis for ignoring serious infirmity or lacuna in the prosecution case. The Court then proceeded to indicate the conditions which must be fully established before conviction can be based on circumstantial evidence. The Court then proceeded to indicate the conditions which must be fully established before conviction can be based on circumstantial evidence. These are : (SCC p. 185, para 153) – (1) the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully established. The circumstances concerned ‘must’ or ‘should’ and not ‘may be’ established; (3) the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency ; (4) they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved; and (5) there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused. 14. In State of U.P. v. Ashok Kumar Srivastava (1992) 2 SCC 86 , it was pointed out that great care must be taken in evaluating circumstantial evidence and if the evidence relied on is reasonably capable of two inferences, the one in favour of the accused must be accepted. It was also pointed out that the circumstances relied upon must be found to have been fully established and the cumulative effect of all the facts so established must be consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt.” 25. Further in respect of circumstantial evidence, the Supreme Court has laid down in Jagroop Singh Versus State of Punjab (2012) 11 SCC 768 at paras 12, 14 and 15 which reads thus : 12. In Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116 (SCC p.185, Para 153) a three-Judge Bench has laid down five golden principles which constitute the “Panchsheel” in respect of a case based on circumstantial evidence. Referring to the decision in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra (1973) 2 SCC 793 (SCC p. 807, para 19) it was opined that it is a primary principle that the accused “must be” and not merely “may be” guilty before a court can convict and the mental distance between “may be” and “must be” is long and divides vague conjectures from sure conclusions. Thereafter, the Bench proceeded to lay down that the facts so established should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused, that is to say, they should not be explainable on any other hypothesis except that the accused is guilty; that the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency ; that they should exclude every possible hypothesis except the one to be proved; and that there must be a chain of evidence so complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for the conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused and must show that in all human probability the act must have been done by the accused. 14. In Balwinder Singh v. State of Punjab 1995 Supp (4) SCC 259, : (SCC p. 262, Para 4) it has been laid down that “4…. the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn should be fully proved and those circumstances must be conclusive in nature to connect the accused with the crime. All the links in the chain of events must be established beyond a reasonable doubt and the established circumstances should be consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and totally inconsistent with his innocence. In a case based on circumstantial evidence, the court has to be on its guard to avoid the danger of allowing suspicion to take place of legal proof and has to be watchful to avoid the danger of being swayed by emotional considerations, however strong they may be, to take the place of proof.” 15. In Harishchandra Ladaku Thange v. State of Maharashtra (2007) 11 SCC 436 while dealing with the validity of inferences to be drawn from circumstantial evidence, it has been emphasized that where a case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence, the inference of guilt can be justified only when all the incriminating facts and circumstances are found to be incompatible with the innocence of the accused or the guilt of any other person and further the circumstances from which an inference as to the guilt of the accused is drawn have to be proved beyond reasonable doubt and have to be shown to be closely connected with the principal fact sought to be inferred from those circumstances.” 26. Reading of the aforesaid principles laid down by the Supreme Court would show that it must nonetheless be emphasized that whether a chain is complete or not would depend on the facts of each case emanating from the evidence and no universal yardstick can be attempted. Based on the said principle, we would like to proceed to evaluate the evidence whether the said circumstances establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. A perusal of the FSL report would firstly show that on chemical examination, deceased’s blood stained T-Shirt and full pant were having a blood group of “B”. Secondly, perusal of evidence would further show that on recovery of knife from accused Manish immediately after the incident the same was having a blood group of “B”. The accused was arrested immediately after the incident. No injury was stated to be found in his arrest memo (Ex.P-28-A). The accused has not given any explanation as to how the blood that too of same group of deceased could be found on the knife used for cutting of vegetables which was recovered at his instance. The accused had to give some explanation as to how the same blood was present on a weapon containing the same blood group of deceased. Thirdly, the evidence would show that the blood stained T-Shirt which was recovered from accused Shankar Chandrawanshi on 05.10.2018 was having blood of group “B” though the Danda (Lathi) and Nicker seized from him were found to have only blood which was disintegrated. Fourthly the bamboo club (Danda) seized from Durga Chandrawanshi, was found to have human blood and likewise, the blood stained Banian and Chadda (underwear) seized from Durga Chandra Chandrawanshi were having “B” blood group and no group was ascertained on Gamcha. No explanation has been made by accused in their examination u/s 313 about presence of human blood on articles seized from them. 27. The appellants have placed reliance on a decision of Supreme Court in Prakash Vs. State of Karnataka (2014) 12 SCC 133 to submit that recovery of blood stained clothes do not advance cause of prosecution. A perusal of the said decision would show that in that case, the blood sample of accused was sent for examination and the report received from Laboratory was to the effect that the blood sample was decomposed and therefore, its origin and grouping could not be established. A perusal of the said decision would show that in that case, the blood sample of accused was sent for examination and the report received from Laboratory was to the effect that the blood sample was decomposed and therefore, its origin and grouping could not be established. Here in the instant cases, the weapon seized from accused Manish Kumar was having ‘B’ blood group and the T-Shirt was having blood. Comparatively, the deceased’s T-Shirt and full-pant was having a blood group of B which matches to the blood group-B found on the knife seized from Manish Kumar used for cutting of vegetables. Likewise, on the T-shirt of Shankar Chandrawanshi, the presence of human blood with B group was found present. Likewise, the blood stained clothes i.e, banian and Chadda (nicker) seized from Durga Chandrawanshi, were found to be having “B” blood group. In respect of accused Komal, mere presence of human blood was stated on Danda (Lathi), Full Shirt and Full Pant seized from him. Therefore, some cloud of uncertainty loomed over the conduct and participation accused Komal Chandrawanshi. However, the presence of blood that too of the same group in the articles seized from Manish Kumar , Shankar Chandrawanshi and Durga Chandrawanshi has not been explained by accused, specially when they were immediately arrested and they did not have any injury in person according to their arrest memo. 28. The Supreme Court in State of Andhra Pradesh Vs. Kanda Gopaludu AIR 2005 S.C. 3616 considered this aspect to hold that when the incriminating material against the seizure of shirt stained with blood and FSL report shows that it is a human blood, then it would be an incriminating circumstances and further as has been held in Ganga Bai Versus State of Rajasthan (2016) 15 SCC 645 , the appellant should have explained how the clothes and articles seized from them contained human blood and in section 313 Cr.P.C., the question is with respect to FSL, no explanation was offered and it was only denial. 29. In the cross examination to the IO, it was not suggested even that he did not proceed fairly and no blood stained clothes were recovered from the accused and there can be no presumption that Police Officers acts dishonestly and his evidence cannot be acted upon. 29. In the cross examination to the IO, it was not suggested even that he did not proceed fairly and no blood stained clothes were recovered from the accused and there can be no presumption that Police Officers acts dishonestly and his evidence cannot be acted upon. Therefore, the evidence of I.O, was sufficient to prove the recovery of blood stained cloths and the weapon of offence i.e., knife and bamboo sticks immediately after the incident from accused. When we travel backwards with FSL report to connect the incident happened prior to such commission of offence, it shows that chain of circumstances as the accused and the deceased had enmity over some dispute about the land. The enmity has been proved by the wife of deceased; The phone call made between deceased and one of the accused has not been explained which was immediately before the incident took place on 03.10.2018. On 03.10.2018, after the phone call was received by the deceased, there was conversation in between deceased Lekhram and Manish and Manish had frequent calls with Shankar. Subsequently when the dead-body was found and postmortem was conducted, recovery was made from accused on 05.10.2018. There is no explanation as to how the same blood group was present on article seized from Manish Sakat, Shankar Chandrawanshi and Durga Chandrawanshi. According to answer given to query report, the injury could be caused by bamboo club and other club which was seized wherein the human blood of group ‘B’ was present. Therefore, the circumstances which cropped up against the accused were not properly explained by accused. 30. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we are of the view that the conviction of Manish Kumar, Shankar Chandrawanshi and Durga Chandrawanshi does not require any interference. With respect to guilt of Komal Chandrawanshi, following the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in Prakash Vs. State of Karnataka (2014) 12 SCC 133 it was not ascertained whether the blood stained clothes and Danda (lathi) recovered from Komal Chandrawanshi was having the same blood group of deceased Lekhram though mere presence of blood was found. In such circumstances, the circumstantial evidence against Komal Chandrawanshi does not connect the chain to prove the guilt against him beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the appeal filed by accused Durga Chandrawanshi, Shankar Chandrawanshi and Manish Sakat are dismissed and the appeal preferred by Komal Chandravanshi is allowed. In such circumstances, the circumstantial evidence against Komal Chandrawanshi does not connect the chain to prove the guilt against him beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the appeal filed by accused Durga Chandrawanshi, Shankar Chandrawanshi and Manish Sakat are dismissed and the appeal preferred by Komal Chandravanshi is allowed. The conviction and sentence imposed on appellant Komal Chandravanshi is set aside and he be released from jail forthwith if he is not required with any other crime.