JUDGMENT : (Kardak Ete, J.) Heard Mr. L. Perme, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard Ms. L. Hage, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, Arunachal Pradesh, for respondent No.1 and Mr. C.Modi, learned counsel, for the accused/respondent No.2. 2. This Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25.05.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Sessions Division, Basar in BSR/SESS-847/13, whereby the accused, namely, Sri Tajit Mosu has been acquitted from the charges by giving him the benefit of doubt. 3. The case set up by the prosecution is to the effect that on 28.02.2013, at 0700 hrs, a telephonic information was received from an unknown caller to the effect that an unidentified dead body was lying dumped in a roadside drain at Sigin-1 Colony, Daporijo, Upper Subansiri District. The Investigating Officer, along with the Officer-in- charge of the Daporijo Police Station and party left for the reported spot. At the place of occurrence, an unidentified dead body of a boy aged around 22 years was found lying in the roadside drain. The photograph of the dead body and the place of occurrence were taken and inquest conducted. One Nokia mobile model CE 0434, IMEI No.351985/04/520428/3 with a BSNL SIM Card and a 100 rupees denomination was found from the long pant pocket of the deceased. These items were seized and packed. During inquest, multiple stab injuries were found on the head, below right color bone and back part of the body. The place of occurrence was thoroughly searched on which no weapon of offence was found. Clusters of blood pool was found scattered in and around the place of occurrence. Some of blood stains from the place of occurrence were lifted for scientific examination. Series of blood stains were detected beginning from the place of occurrence and ending at the District Hospital, Daporijo, which revealed the link. The dead body was transported to the District Hospital, Daporijo for identification and post mortem examination thereof. At the hospital, the dead body was identified to be of Late Vijoy Ramching, son of Sri Tapa Ramching, appellant herein. The parents of the deceased were intimated through phone and they had accordingly reported and confirmed the dead body to be their son Vijoy Ramching. 4. At the hospital, the dead body was identified to be of Late Vijoy Ramching, son of Sri Tapa Ramching, appellant herein. The parents of the deceased were intimated through phone and they had accordingly reported and confirmed the dead body to be their son Vijoy Ramching. 4. Accordingly, a written FIR was lodged by the father of the deceased on 28.02.2013 to the effect that his son Vijoy Ramching was brutally murdered by unknown person on the night of 27.02.2013 at Sigin colony, Daporijo. It states that the people residing nearby the place of occurrence had seen the foot wears of suspects, scattered and stuck in the mud in the morning and those were collected by the concerned police officer for investigation. Pursuant thereto, a case was registered being Daporijo PS Case No. 20/2013, under Section 302 of the IPC , 1860. Upon completion of the investigation, the charge sheet was laid being Charge Sheet No.39/2013, dated 26.05.2013, against five accused persons, namely, Sri Tajo Mosu, Sri Tam @ Gom Mosu, Sri Tajit Mosu, Sri Tapa Mosu and Sri Talin Mosu, under Section 302/34 of the IPC , 1860. 5. Except accused/respondent No.2 herein, Shri Tajit Mosu, all other four co- accused persons, namely, Sri Tajo Mosu, Sri Tam @ Gom Mosu, Sri Tapa Mosu and Sri Talin Mosu were found to be juvenile. Accordingly, vide orders dated 09/01/2014, 14/01/2014 and 23/07/2014, the four accused found to be juvenile along with their case records, were forwarded to the Juvenile Justice Board, Daporijo for enquiry and disposal as per the law. 6. The learned Court below, framed charges against the accused/respondent No.2 Shri Tajit Mosu vide order dated 28.01.2015 and the substance of the charge was read over and explained to him to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tired. 7. In the course of trial, the prosecution has examined as many as 14 prosecution witnesses including the Investigating Officer and also exhibited certain documents and material exhibits. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC, 1973 wherein the accused had pleaded innocence. The defence has declined to adduce any defence witness. 8. 7. In the course of trial, the prosecution has examined as many as 14 prosecution witnesses including the Investigating Officer and also exhibited certain documents and material exhibits. The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC, 1973 wherein the accused had pleaded innocence. The defence has declined to adduce any defence witness. 8. Upon consideration of the evidence adduced on record, the learned Trial Court acquitted the accused/respondent No.2, by giving the benefit of doubt on the ground that there were so many discrepancies/inconsistencies or gap/break in circumstantial evidence in entire prosecution evidence and the prosecution has not proved its case conclusively with dependable material evidence. 9. Mr. L. Perme, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the impugned judgment and order dated 25.05.2022 is perverse and therefore, not sustainable in law in as much as the learned Trial Court has failed to appreciate the depositions of PW-4, PW-7, PW-10, PW-11 and PW-13 as well as the statement of the accused/respondent No.2, recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC. The learned trial court has failed to appreciate the undisputed facts which hademerged that just prior to the incident, the present accused was along with other four co-accused (Juveniles) and after the incident, one of the co-accused Sri Tajo Mosu (Juvenile) was missing for whole night and other four co-accused including the present accused/respondent No.2 were together at the Sumo counter in the early morning. One of the co-accused was having bandage on his right arm and the four accused including the present accused/respondent No.2 left for Siyum together. Moreover, Sri Tajo Mosu (Juvenile) admitted the incident and the present accused/respondent No.2 was arrested from Siyum along with other co-accused and the deceased was attacked by at least more than one person, as injuries were from front and backside of the body. Therefore, Mr. Perme submits that if the statement of the above prosecution witnesses along with the statement of the accused/respondent No.2, recorded under Section 313 of the CrPC and the post conduct of the accused are taken together, it is proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused Tajit Mosu had participated in the murder of the deceased Vijoy Ramching, in furtherance of common intention. 10. Mr. 10. Mr. L. Perme, learned counsel, submits that the fact from the FSL report that blood of the victim was found in the blue cotton full shirt and blue jeans long pant of Shri Tajo Mosu; on cotton knee pant of khaki colour of Talin @ Nyalin Mosu, the blood of the deceased was found and in cotton half sweater belongs to said Taliln @ Nyalin Mosu and on the silk full jacket (ash colour) belong to Shri Tajit Mosu, blood of injured accused Shri Tam @ Gom Mosu was found, which proves the case of the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt, which clearly indicates that the present accused was party to the whole incident. 11. Mr. Perme, learned counsel, submits that even assuming while not accepting, that the evidence in the case had been rightly appreciated by learned Trial Court, then also the appellant is raising a ground for interfering with the impugned judgment and order on the ground that even if in case there is defective investigation and defective presentation of the witnesses by the prosecution, once the Trial Court, during trial finds some material witnesses that would have throw light on main controversy/issues of the case, evidences of such witness to complete the chain of link, then learned Trial Court is duty bound to invoke Section 311 of the CrPC. However, in the present case the learned Trial Court, even after categorical finding about material witnesses that would throw light on the necessary facts failed to invoke Section 311 of the CrPC, as it is observed by the learned Trial Court that the statement of driver Talar Soki and one Charu Dui would give clear picture of involvement of present accused but did not examine them as witnesses by invoking Section 311 of the CrPC. 12. He submits that the learned Trial Court has held that the FSL report is ambiguous, thereby discarded the said report, whereas if in the understanding of the learned Trial Court, if the FSL report was ambiguous, then he was duty bound to invoke Section 311 of the CrPC and call the Scientist who prepared the report as witness to get clear understanding of the report. But, instead, the learned Trial Court mechanically applied its own mind over the FSL report, which is one of the material evidences in the case. But, instead, the learned Trial Court mechanically applied its own mind over the FSL report, which is one of the material evidences in the case. Since the learned Trial Court has failed to adhere to its statutory duty which resulted into miscarriage of justice, it is a fit case where this Court may be pleased to direct further inquiry or re-trial of the case for meeting the ends of justice. 13. Mr. L. Perme, learned counsel for the appellant, in support of his submissions, has placed reliance of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Varsha Garg vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others , reported in 2022 SCC OnLine SC 986. 14. Ms. L. Hage, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor, appearing for State submits that in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the learned Trial Court ought to have invoked Section 311 of the CrPC, 1973 as the same appears to be essential. However, she submits that since the PW-8 has been examined, the examination of one Shri Talar Soki, the driver, who accompanied PW-8 would not make much difference, but one Charu Dui who was present at the place of occurence, ought to have been examined. She further submits that the FSL report appears to be very doubtful and the clothes which were seized were not exhibited by the Investigating Officer. She fairly submits that in the present case, no proper investigation appears to have been conducted which resulted in failure of the prosecution. 15. Mr. C. Modi, learned counsel appearing for the accused/ respondent No.2, submits that there is no eye witness to the alleged incident and the appellant is trying to make failed attempt to convict the accused based on circumstantial evidence. In the present case, the prosecution has failed to prove the charge against the accused/respondent No.2 beyond reasonable doubt. Even if two views are possible, the view tilted towards the accused should be prepared and the benefit of doubt is to be given to the accused. He submits that even if the power under Section 311 of the CrPC is onvoked, no materials evidence would have been there, as the prosecution has miserably failed to establish any tangible material evidences. The depositions of all the witnesses are clearly hearsay evidence without there being any corroboration. He submits that even if the power under Section 311 of the CrPC is onvoked, no materials evidence would have been there, as the prosecution has miserably failed to establish any tangible material evidences. The depositions of all the witnesses are clearly hearsay evidence without there being any corroboration. Even if to convict the accused on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the chain of circumstance has to be clearly proved. There should not be any break in the chain. He submits that there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment and order dated 25.05.2022, passed by the learned Trial Court and therefore, no interference is called for with the acquittal of the respondent No.2. 16. Mr. C. Modi, learned counsel appearing for the accused/ respondent No.2, in support of his submissions, has relied on the following decisions:- 1. Gargi vs. State of Haryana, reported in (2019) 9 SCC 738 . 2. State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Rajkumar reported in (2014) 14 SCC 39 . 3. Kalyan Kumar Gogoi vs. Ashutosh Agnihotri reported in (2011) 2 SCC 532 . 4. Vijay Shankar vs. State of Haryana reported in (2015) 12 SCC 644 and 5. Manhar vs. State of Haryana reported in (2010) 11 SCC 423 17. We have considered the rival submissions of learned counsel for the parties and also perused the records. 18. The present appeal is filed by Sri Tapa Ramching, father of the victim/deceased Late Vijoy Ramching, whose dead body was lying dumped in a roadside drain at Sigin- 1 Colony, Daporijo on the fateful night of 27.02.2013. Essentially, the appellant has advanced two grounds viz. on the circumstantial evidence and for invoking the power under Section 311 of the CrPC, 1973. 19. The learned Trial Court having found discrepancy/inconsistency and gap in the circumstantial evidence in the entire prosecution evidence, has held that the prosecution has failed to prove the case conclusively with dependable material evidence against the accused, thereby extended the benefit of doubt and has acquitted the accused/ respondent No.2. 20. In order to appreciate the case, it is apposite to refer and consider the deposition of the prosecution witnesses. 21. 20. In order to appreciate the case, it is apposite to refer and consider the deposition of the prosecution witnesses. 21. PW-1, Shri Tapa Ramching, complainant and father of the deceased (the appellant herein) had deposed, while identifying the accused person standing in the dock as Sri Tajit Mosu, that on 1st of March 2013 when he was at Mara village after coming from there, he got the information that his son Lt. Vijay Ramching has been murdered and his body was lying in Sigin Nallah, Daporijo. By the time he reached Daporijo, the body of the deceased was already shifted to the Daporijo District Hospital and post mortem was also conducted in his absence. During enquiry by the police, it was revealed that five accused persons namely Sri Tajit Mosu, Sri Tam Mosu, Sri Tajo Mosu, Sri Tapa Mosu and Sri Talem Mosu were involved in the incident and hence they were arrested by the police. In cross examination, he stated that he knew the accused person from the date of incident. He had stated that his late son had no enmity with anyone. He lodged the compliant/FIR after getting the information about the incident. 22. PW-2, Smt. Yapa Ramching, mother of the deceased, had stated that on the day of incident, she was at Ramching and her late son was at Daporijo. She did not see the incident. From police enquiry she came to know that five accused persons namely Sri Tajit Mosu, Sri Tam Mosu, Sri Tajo Mosu, Sri Tapa Mosu and Sri Talem Mosu were involved in the incident and hence they were arrested by the police. 23. PW-3 had deposed that in February 2013, once she heard from her colony people that someone had been murdered in the previous night and his dead body was at hospital. So along with her husband she went to the District Hospital, Daporijo and found that it was the dead body of her cousin Lt. Vijay Ramching. 24. PW-4 had deposed that in the night about 10-11 pm, someone knocked at his rented house at Polo colony and was calling his name during which he was in deep sleep. After repeated calling and knocking at his door, he opened the door and found that it was his friend Tajo Mosu. After opening the door he went back to his bed. After repeated calling and knocking at his door, he opened the door and found that it was his friend Tajo Mosu. After opening the door he went back to his bed. Shri Tajo Mosu switched on the television and was watching it for long and in between he said that in that night he assaulted one boy at Sigin colony and he did not know whether he was alive or not. Next day when Tajo Mosu helped his land owner Shri Tayu Doyum in constrcuting his house, he noticed that Tajo Mosu did not have even sleeper and his clothes were full of mud which he did not notice in the previous night because of being sleepy. In the day time, he heard that one boy was murdered and police came alongwith Tajo Mosu to take his statement in connection with the case. In cross, he stated that the accused is from his own circle therefore, he knows him. 25. PW-5 had deposed that in February 2013, once he heard from some people that someone's dead body was lying in the hospital. When he went to the hospital, he could recognize that it was the dead body of his brother Vijay Ramching. However he did not know how he died or who assaulted him. PW-6 had deposed that on 27.02.2013 at about 8.40 pm, he received telephonic call from his Lt. brother from Daporijo. At that time he was at Itanagar. The deceased conveyed to him that he was unable to transfer money to him. On the next day i.e. 28.02.2013 at about 06:30 am, he came to know that his elder brother Vijay Ramching was murdered by someone. And later on he heard that around 5(five) people were arrested in this case. 26. PW-7, on being cross-examined by the learned Public Prosecutor, had deposed that in the next morning of the incident, her brother Sh. Tako Mosu came to her residence at Transport Colony, Daporijo and stated that in the previous night Sh. Tajo Mosu, Sh. Tape Mosu, Talin Mosu and Sh. Tajit Mosu had fight with deceased Lt. Vijay Ramsing and Lt. Vijay Ramsing died on the spot. He also reported that Sh. Tajo Mosu was missing since last night. So she became worried for her brother Tajo Mosu and sent Sh. Tabet Mosu to search her brother Tajo Mosu. Tajo Mosu, Sh. Tape Mosu, Talin Mosu and Sh. Tajit Mosu had fight with deceased Lt. Vijay Ramsing and Lt. Vijay Ramsing died on the spot. He also reported that Sh. Tajo Mosu was missing since last night. So she became worried for her brother Tajo Mosu and sent Sh. Tabet Mosu to search her brother Tajo Mosu. While appearing before her, Tajo Mosu admitted of the aforesaid fight taking place in the previous night. Fearing the tradition of revenge, she directed him to surrender himself along with his friends before the police. In cross, she stated that the accused person is one of her clan brothers. Her brother Shri Taju Mosu did not tell her as to how they killed Lt. Vijay Ramsing nor did he disclose about any weapon used for offence. 27. PW-8, Mr. Tanam Siyum, had deposed, while identifying the accused as Tajit Mosu, that in one late night of the year 2013 when he was on duty at Daporijo PS as ASI, information was received from the District Hospital, Daporijo that one person has cut injuries on his hand and the matter seems to be a police case. On receiving this information he rushed to District Hospital, Daporijo with his driver namely Mr. Talar Soki and in the hospital they found the injured person and upon enquiry, the injured disclosed his name as Manik Mosu and told them that they (police) should go to Dobhi line. He thought that the person, who was found injured in the hospital, was beaten by somebody and accordingly they went to Dobhi line to search for the assaulter but they did not find anyone. In cross-examination, he stated that accused standing on the dock is not the injured person he saw at the District Hospital, Daporijo. 28. PW-10 had deposed that on 28.02.2013, in the morning hours around 8 am, one Smt. Yak Eru, who is the sister of Tajo Mosu, had repeatedly requested him to search her brother Tajo Mosu. On repeated request, he started looking for Tajo Mosu and found him at Airport colony, Daporijo and took him to his sister Smt. Yak Eru. He came to know that Tajo Mosu and his friends Tapa Mosu, Tajit Mosu and Tam Mosu were involved in some kind of fight. He gave his statement before S.I. T. Dubi. On repeated request, he started looking for Tajo Mosu and found him at Airport colony, Daporijo and took him to his sister Smt. Yak Eru. He came to know that Tajo Mosu and his friends Tapa Mosu, Tajit Mosu and Tam Mosu were involved in some kind of fight. He gave his statement before S.I. T. Dubi. In cross, he stated that he recognize the accused persons as they belong from same village and clan. He admitted that he heard the information from other. 29. PW-11 had deposed that on 27.02.2013 he was shifting his belongings from his rented house to airport colony, Daporijo with the help of one Tata sumo. In the afternoon, one Talin Mosu along with Tapa Mosu, Tajit Mosu, and Tam Mosu, came and helped him in shifting. After shifting, he provided some beers and meat to them. Around 08:30 pm, all of them left his place. On the next day, when he was in sumo counter, Daporijo, Shri Tapa Mosu, Tam Mosu, Talin Mosu, Tajit Mosu came to his counter and amongst them Tam Mosu was having bandage on his right arm and on enquiry all of them told him that there was a fight and Tajo Mosu had inflicted injury on Tam Mosu but then he was missing. In the sumo counter, he came to know that one boy was killed and his body was lying dead and after hearing this, Tapa Mosu, Tam Mosu, Talin Mosu, Tajit Mosu ran away to Siyum Village. Since Tajo Mosu was missing he started looking for him and later he found him with his sister Yake Eru. On inquiry Tajo Mosu, told him that a fight took place in previous night at Sigin Colony, Daporijo. Thereafter ,he and Tajo Mosu went to Siyum village where Tam Mosu, Talin Mosu, Tajit Mosu were hiding and all of us surrendered before the village elders and subsequently they were arrested by the police and he remained in custody for 5 months. In cross-examination, he stated that accused Tajit Mosu and all the four accused namely- Tapa Mosu, Tam Mosu, Talin Mosu, and Tajo Mosu did not possess any weapon like dao or knife when they were in his house. Tam Mosu told him that he sustained injury on his right arm during a fight which was caused by Tajo Mosu by a knife. 30. Tam Mosu told him that he sustained injury on his right arm during a fight which was caused by Tajo Mosu by a knife. 30. PW-12, the Doctor, had deposed that on 28.02.2013, around 10.30 am, dead body of Lt. Vijay Ramching aged about 22 years was brought to the hospital for postmortem examination on the requisition of police and SI Token Dubi of Daporijo police Station was present. On the same day at 12.30 pm, he performed postmortem examination on the dead body and found following external injuries."1. Occipital region 3 x 2cm (length x depth), 2. Back of neck 3 x 3 cm (length x depth), 3. Upper part of right shoulder crossing back to front 3 x 7 cm (length x depth), 4. Upper part of right arm 3 x 2 cm (length x depth), 5. Lower part of the left scapular region (back)10 x 15 cm (length x depth) & 6. Middle part of right scapular region (back) 3 x 5 cm (length x depth). Doctor opined that the cause of the death of Late Vijay Ramching was due to the shock and hemorrhage following puncture of the heart and its vessels by penetrating injury with double edged sharp weapon. 31. PW-13, the other Doctor, had deposed that while he was on duty in the intervening night of 27-28.02.2013 as Medical Officer at District Hospital, Daporijo, at around mid-night of 27.02.2013, one injured person, who introduced himself as Mr. Manik Mosu, came to the hospital having deep lacerated injury on right forearm measuring 6 X 3 cm caused by sharp weapon. There was profuse bleeding from the injury as major blood vessels were severed. Mr. Manik Mosu was immediately taken to OT and surgery was conducted. Meanwhile the hospital authorities informed the police about the nature of injury sustained by Mr. Manik Mosu. SI T. Dubi of Daporijo Police arrived and submitted an official requisition letter. Later on, during enquiry he came to know that Mr. Manik Mosu had given fake name whereas his actual name was other than Mr. Manik Mosu. 32. PW-14, the Investigating officer, had narrated the entire investigation which is summarised in the chargesheet. He exhibited the original copy of FIR as P.EXT-1 and the inquest report as P.EXT-5. He also exhibited the dead body challan of Lt. Manik Mosu had given fake name whereas his actual name was other than Mr. Manik Mosu. 32. PW-14, the Investigating officer, had narrated the entire investigation which is summarised in the chargesheet. He exhibited the original copy of FIR as P.EXT-1 and the inquest report as P.EXT-5. He also exhibited the dead body challan of Lt. Vijoy Ramching as P.EXT-6 and the seizure memo of silk full jacket of the accused Sh. Tajit Mosu as P.EXT-7. The I.O has further exhibited the forwarding letter of exhibits seized in this case and sent to CFSL Guwahati through SP, Daporijo dated 17/04/2013 as P.EXT-8. The P.EXT-9 is the rough sketch map drawn by the I.O and the M.EXT-1 (series) is the photographs of deceased's body. 33. The IO has stated that on the night of incident, while stabbing the deceased, accidently co-accused Shri Tajo Mosu had hit another co-accused -2 Shri Tam @ Gom Mosu with a knife due to which latter sustained injuries on his body. The accused persons had reportedly come to District Hospital, Daporijo for necessary treatment in the same night of incident. However, above accidentally injured co-accused had disclosed his fake name as Manik Mosu to the attending Doctor so as to mislead him and the police. On the next day of the incident, he had collected the list of patients including the aforesaid accused mentioned in the register maintained in the Hospital as Manik Mosu at serial No. 10 from its authority. 34. As per FSL report dated 08.07.2013, exhibit No.3151/F (blue dark colour sport tract shirt of the deceased) gave positive result of human blood of exhibit 3151/A (blue colour full sleeve shirt belongs to main accused Shri Tajo Mosu) and exhibit No.3151/E (one ash colour jacket belongs to accused Tajit Mosu) gave positive test of human blood of exhibit No.3151/B (blue jeans long pant belongs to main accused Shri Tajo Mosu). According to IO, in view of the above, prima facie case is made out that the accused in this case was the accomplice of the main accused Shri Tajo Mosu and since offence was committed with common intention, present accused is also liable. In cross examination, IO has stated that he could not record the name of seizure witnesses on the seizure memo as there was no appropriate person for such purpose available at the Police Station, Daporijo where the exhibits were seized. In cross examination, IO has stated that he could not record the name of seizure witnesses on the seizure memo as there was no appropriate person for such purpose available at the Police Station, Daporijo where the exhibits were seized. He doesn't remember preparing of seizure memo of three exhibits mentioned in the letter dated 17.04.2013. He had stated that there is no direct witness to the incident. The weapon of offence could not be recovered despite best effort. The charge sheet was filed not only basing on circumstantial evidence but also on other material evidences. There is no direct incriminating evidence against the present accused. 35. On the scrutiny of the deposition of the Prosecution witnesses, we find that there is no eye witness and all are hearsay evidences. There is no direct witness or evidence recorded by the prosecution during trial to prove the case conclusively. The name, identity and role of the accused/respondent No. 2 in committing the offence charged individually or with common intention is not proved from circumstantial evidence. 36. From the deposition of PW-8, Assistant Sub Inspector, who has stated that though in one late night on 27-28.02.2013, he and his driver Talar Soki had seen one injured person on being informed from the Hospital, who introduced himself as Manik Mosu, at the District Hospital, he did not mention about the presence of accused Tajit Mosu with Manik Mosu who in the later course of investigation were identified to be one of the juveniles in conflict with law. PW-8 has categorically stated in his cross examination that the accused Tajit Mosu is not the injured person he had seen at District Hospital on the said night on 27-28.02.2013. PW-13, Medical officer, who conducted surgery on said Manik Mosu, has also not stated that the presence of accused Tajit Mosu with Manik Mosu. In fact, PW-13, has not even mentioned any other person. Though, Shri Talar Soki, the driver of Pw-8 and one Shri Charu Dui, found at the place of occurrence in intervening night of 27-28.02.2013, have not made witnesses and examined, the same would not have established any tangible materials in view of the fact that the PW-8 was examined. 37. In fact, PW-13, has not even mentioned any other person. Though, Shri Talar Soki, the driver of Pw-8 and one Shri Charu Dui, found at the place of occurrence in intervening night of 27-28.02.2013, have not made witnesses and examined, the same would not have established any tangible materials in view of the fact that the PW-8 was examined. 37. Regard been had to the extra judicial confession made before PW-4 and PW-7, the same cannot be relied/acted upon as the same is not a conclusive piece of evidence as there is no corroboration with other reliable and admissible evidence to establish the guilt of the accused particularly where the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. 38. Admittedly, no weapon used for offence alleged is found to have been seized by the IO despite injuries sustained by the deceased are proved to have been penetrative in nature being caused with double edged sharp weapon as per the opinion of PW-12, the Doctor, who conducted the post mortem examination. The seizure memo of silk full jacket ash colour said to have been seized from the possession of the accused has no date of seizure, no signature of accused and no seizure witnesses. The seized jacket of the accused has not been exhibited by PW-14 during trial. Of course, accused has denied of seizing of his jacket in his section 313 of Cr.P.C, 1973 examination. Having considered above, we find that the enire investigation appears to have been done in a perfunctory manner and in total violation of the procedure of law. 39. The onus is on the prosecution to prove that the chain is complete in a case based on circumstantial evidence and the infirmity or lacuna in prosecution cannot be cured by false defence. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in catena of decisions has settled the law on the point. In the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (1984) 4 SCC 116 , while dealing with circumstantial evidence, it has been held that onus was on the prosecution to prove that the chain is complete and the infirmity or lacuna in prosecution cannot be cured by false defence or plea. The five golden principles viz. In the case of Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra, reported in (1984) 4 SCC 116 , while dealing with circumstantial evidence, it has been held that onus was on the prosecution to prove that the chain is complete and the infirmity or lacuna in prosecution cannot be cured by false defence or plea. The five golden principles viz. the Panchseel , of the proof of a case based circumstantial evidence, laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court are: (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; (2) 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; (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. 40. In Varsha Garg (Supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held which is reproduced herein under:- “28. Having clarified that the bar under Section 301 is inapplicable and that the appellant is well placed to pursue this appeal, we now examine Section 311 of CrPC. Section 311 provides that the Court, may : (i) Summon any person as a witness or to examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness. (ii) Recall and re-examine any person who has already been examined. This power can be exercised at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under the CrPC. The latter part of Section 311 states that the Court “shall” summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person “if his evidence appears to the Court to be essential to the just decision of the case”. Section 311 contains a power upon the Court in broad terms. The statutory provision must be read purposively, to achieve the intent of the statute to aid in the discovery of truth. 29. Section 311 contains a power upon the Court in broad terms. The statutory provision must be read purposively, to achieve the intent of the statute to aid in the discovery of truth. 29. The first part of the statutory provision which uses the expression “may” postulates that the power can be exercised at any stage of an inquiry, trial or other proceeding. The latter part of the provision mandates the recall of a witness by the Court as it uses the expression “shall summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case”. Essentiality of the evidence of the person who is to be examined coupled with the need for the just decision of the case constitute the touchstone which must guide the decision of the Court. The first part of the statutory provision is discretionary while the latter part is obligatory.” 41. It is true that the court is vested with power under section 311, Cr.PC, to summon and examine or recall and re-xamine any material witness at any stage and closing of prosecution evidence would not be bar. It is also true the duty is cast upon the court to allow prosecution to correct an error in the interest of justice. However, in the present case, in view of the manner the investigation was carried out, we see no ground to invoke section 311, Cr.PC as no material witness could be pointed out which requires to be examined or re-examined except one Shri Charu Dui, who is stated to be present at the place of occurence and in our view, even if he was examined no material difference could have been made out by the prosecution. 42. 42. Having regard to the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that even if in case there is defective investigation and defective presentation of the witnesses by the prosecution, once the Trial Court during trial finds some material witnesses that would have throw light on main controversy/issues of the case, evidences of such witness to complete the chain of link, then learned Trial Court is duty bound to invoke Section 311 of the CrPC, we are of the view that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge against the accused/respondent No.2 beyond reasonable doubt and even if the power under Section 311 of the CrPC is invoked, no material difference would have there as as the prosecution has miserably failed to establish any tangible material evidences. As noted herein above, the deposition of all the witnesses are hearsay evidence. Thus, the ground urged and the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant is considered for rejection. 43. On the close scrutiny of the testimonies in the present case, it would show that there is no eye witness to the incident. The entire case of the prosecution appears to be on the circumstantial evidence. It is well settled that in the cases where the evidence is of a circumstantial nature, the circumstances from which the conclusion of guilt is to be drawn, should be at first instance be fully established and all the facts so established, should be consistent only with the hypothesis of guilt of the accused. Again the circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and tendency and there should not be such as to exclude every hypothesis except the one proposed to be proved. In other words, there must be a chain of evidence so far complete, as not to leave any reasonable ground for conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused. It must be such as to show that within all human probability of the act, must have been done by the accused. 44. On the careful scrutiny of the evidence on record and finding of the learned Trial Court, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the guilt of the accused /respondent No.2 beyond reasonable doubt. 44. On the careful scrutiny of the evidence on record and finding of the learned Trial Court, we are of the considered opinion that the prosecution has miserably failed to establish the guilt of the accused /respondent No.2 beyond reasonable doubt. The circumstantial evidence sought to be based for conviction, also cannot be accepted as the circumstances taken cumulatively does not form a chain at all so complete that there is no scope from conclusion that within human probability, the crime was committed by the accused and none else and the circumstantial evidence, in order to sustain conviction must be complete and capable 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. Thus, there is no infirmity in the impugned judgment and order dated 25.05.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Sessions Division, Basar in BSR/SESS-847/13, under Section 302/34 of the IPC , by which the accused/respondent No.2 has been acquitted by giving him the benefit of doubt. 45. We have perused the case laws relied on by the learned counsel for the respondent No.2 and we deem it not necessary to discuss as the same are settled principle of law. 46. In view of discussion made herein above, we find no infirmity in the judgment and order dated 25.05.2022, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Sessions Division, Basar in BSR/SESS-847/13, in acquittal of the accused/respondent No. 2 from charges under Section 302/34 of the IPC , 1860. Consequently, the judgment and order dated 25.05.2022 is hereby affirmed. 46. In the result, the Criminal Appeal stands dismissed. TCR be sent back.