JUDGMENT

1. This appeal by way of special leave has been filed against the concurrent judgments of conviction of the Sessions Court and the High Court by which the appellant, Rupchand has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for having committed the murder of Parasram Bhoyar, resident of village Pathari, police station Goregaon.

2. The facts of the appeal are as under:

Bhaiyalal Patel PW. 1, a resident of village Saitola, which is adjacent to village Pathari, was at the relevant time working as a Police Patil of villages Saitola and Pathari. On 14th May, 1999, he received a message from one Premlal Rane of village Pathari that a dead body was lying in the field of Shriram Maldhari, a resident of village Pathari. Bhaiyalal Patel thereupon proceeded to Pathari and thereafter to the field of Shriram Maldhari and found the dead body of Parasram Bhoyar lying there. He accordingly made a report and on that basis a first information report was registered at Police Station, Goregaon. PW. 7 Krishna, the Police Station in-charge then visited the place of murder, entered the inquest proceedings relating to the dead body, and referred it for the post mortem examination. As there was some suspicion with regard to the appellant's involvement, an attempt was made to arrest him but he was not available and was ultimately arrested on 29th May, 1999. The appellant allegedly made a statement under Section 27 of the Evidence Act before recovery witnesses that he had concealed the axe used in the murder in his house and on this basis the murder weapon was recovered. On the completion of the investigation the accused was charged for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and was brought to trial.

3. The prosecution in support of its case examined PW. 1-Bhaiyalal Patel, PW. 2-Murlidhar Bisen allegedly an eye-witness, PW. 3-Babulal Bhojraj another witness who had last seen the accused in the company of the deceased and before whom he had made an extra judicial confession, PW. 4 Dr. Satish Jaiswal, the Medical Officer who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body, and PW. 7 the Investigating Officer, Krishna. The appellant in his statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., denied the allegations levelled against him and pleaded an alibi. The trial court on an appreciation of the evidence convicted the appellant for the offence of murder. This judgment has been confirmed by the High Court in appeal. The High Court held that the fact that the deceased Parasram had met with a homicidal death was clear from the evidence of PW. 2 Murlidhar Bisen which inspired confidence in that he had witnessed the murder at about 6.00 a.m. on 13th May, 1999. The Court also observed that the statement of PW. 3 Babulal Bhojraj who had last seen the appellant and the deceased together was also a circumstance in favour of the prosecution and that the evidence of Dr. Satish Jaiswal PW. 7 the Doctor confirmed the eye witness account that the deceased had been done to death with an axe.

4. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties and gone through the record. It will be noticed that there are several circumstances against the appellant, viz. the eye witness account of PW. 2-Murlidhar

5. Bisen, the evidence of PW. 3 Babulal Bhojraj who had last seen the appellant and the deceased together and then the medical evidence. In the light of the fact that the eye witness account appears to be rather shaky, we have gone through the medical evidence as a whole with very great care with the help of learned Counsel for the parties.

6. We are of the opinion that entire matter would hinge almost exclusively upon the statement of PW. 2 Murlidhar Bisen and if his statement could be taken to be uninspiring the entire prosecution case would become extremely weak which would necessitate some kind of corroboration from other material evidence as in the case of a single witness the evidence must be qualitatively unimpeachable.

7. We have gone through the statement made