JUDGMENT:- This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court dated 29th April, 1987 upholding the judgment of the trial Court dated 19th September, 1985 whereby the appellants were convicted for an offence under Section 302/34, IPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life.

2. On 4th February, 1982 at about 5.30 p.m. one Elem Bux Molla, owner of a brick kiln at Dhib Dhipa was on his way to Dhib Dhipa Bazar for taking tea and snacks when he was accosted by 4-5 persons, including the appellants herein. Appellant No. 1 fired upon him with his gun as a result of which he fell down. Appellant No. 2 slit the throat of Elem Bux with a knife and after raising slogans Inquilab Zindabad all the miscreants including the appellants fled away. According to the prosection story PW-3 and PW-6, both employees of Elex Bux, witnessed the occurrence. Din Mohammad, PW-1, another employee of the deceased heard the sound of gun shots coming from the side of Dhib Dhipa Bazar and he ran towards that place from the field where he was working. On reaching Harwa-Lauhati Road he saw some 4-5 persons running away towards the north along Boalghata Road shouting slogans Inquilab Zindabad. At a little distance he found his master Elem Bux lying in a pool of blood with his throat slit. Some other persons were present at a distance. PW-3 was also seen there and then PW-1 immediately rushed to Police Station, Bangar and lodged First Information Report at about 8.30 p.m. In the First Information Report he stated that "some unknown miscreants" had committed the murder of Elem Bux. On receiving the information, the Police Officer on duty, PW-12 after registering the formal First Information Report took up the investigation in hand. He left for the place of occurrence at about 10.00 p.m. On reaching the place of occurrence he found the body lying on the road. Many people had collected there. He seized a number of incriminating articles from the spot including some empty cartridges etc. He held inquest on the dead body of Elem Bux and sent the dead body for post-mortem examination. On completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was filed against the appellants for an offence under Section 302/34, IPC. The trial Court, as already noticed, convicted them for the offence under Section 302/34, IPC and sentenced them to suffer life imprisonment. The appellants unsuccessfully challenged their conviction and sentenced before the High Court.

3. Both the trial Court and High Court disbelieved PW-6 Tassiruddin Molla whom the prosecution had set up as one of the eye-witnesses. Both the Courts, however, relied upon the testimony of Altab Molla, PW-3. The conviction of the appellants is based upon the testimony of a single eye-witness, PW-3. Both the Courts found PW-3 to be a reliable witness and his evidence sufficient to convict the appellants.

4. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted before us that PW-3 was not a wholly reliable witness and his conduct was so unnatural that it would be unsafe to rely upon his testimony to uphold the conviction of the appellants. Learned counsel, in this connection, pointed out that though PW-3 was an employee of the deceased, after seeing the ghastly assault on his master, he not only did not go to the Police but did not even disclose what he had seen to anybody at his home or in the village or even at the place of his work till the next day and that too only after his statement was recorded by the Police during the afternoon of the next day i.e. 5th February, 1982. Mr. Puri, learned counsel appearing for the respondent on the other hand argued that since PW-3 has been relied upon by both the trial Court and the High Court, this Court need not, in this appeal by special leave, go into the correctness of the findings recorded by the Courts below on the basis of appreciation of evidence. It is submitted that from the evidence of PW-3 the offence against the appellants stood amply established.

5. We