The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of a thorough and fair investigation process in establishing the authenticity of the prosecution's case and ensuring the credibility of witness testimonies.

Shyam Kishore Sharma and Rajendra Kumar Mishra JJ.

1. The Appellant Chandra Shekhar Matho has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to under go rigorous imprisonment for life by judgment dated 3.3.1989 passed in Sessions Trial No 216 of 1986 by the Learned Sessions Judge Begusarai. This appeal is against that judgment and order.

2. The prosecution case is that at about 8.00 P.M. on 31.8.1979 when the deceased Rajendra Sahni was returning to his house from Pakthouli Chowk, six persons were also with him. The further prosecution case is that when he reached near a Mahua tree on bandh, 2 three persons, namely, Sita Ram Mathon (now dead), Chandra Shekhar Matho ( Appellant) and Sarbeshwar paswan ( absconder) came up. Thereafter, Sita Ram Matho and the Appellant Chandra Shekhar Matho pumped out the bullets in the body of the deceased causing his instantaneous death. The accused, Sarbeshwar Paswan was armed with lathi but he did not commit any overt act. The persons accompanying the deceased raised alarm on which the persons of nearby villages came whereupon the accused persons reiterated. In the night vigil was kept on the dead body. In the next morning at 6.00 A.M. the informant, Company Sahni, P.W.5 went to the concerned Police Station and gave his statement (Ext.1) and, accordingly, a case was registered under Sections 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code which resulted in Teghra P.S. Case No1(7) 1989. The S.I., Ram Baboo, P.W.6, came at the place of occurrence and prepared inquest report (Ext.4). He seized the blood stained earth and prepared the seizure list (Ext.3). The dead body of the deceased was sent to the Sadar Hospital for post-mortem examination which was done (Ext.2). Thereafter the case was investigated by the police and after investigation finding the case to be true submitted charge sheet. The cognizance of the offence was taken and thereafter the case was committed to the court of sessions for trial.

3. The defence of the Appellant was that the deceased himself was notorious criminal of the locality and he was involved in several cases under Sections 395 and 396 of the Indian Penal Code and the deceased was murdered in a different manner by the persons with whom he had grudged and animosity and the Appellant has been falsely implicated in this case. In support of his claim, the defence has brought 3 on record a copy of the different charge sheet and a copy of the different F.I.R. which was exhibited as Exhibits A and B.

4. The prosecution in order to prove its case has examined six witnesses. P.W.1, Shankar Prasad, is a constable and is a formal witness and has proved the writing of the formal F.I.R. P.W. 2 Jageshwar Sahani and P.W. 3 Baso Sahani, were examined as eye witnesses to the occurrence. The informant, Company Sahni was examined as P.W 5. P.W.4, Gulam Saiful Haque is a doctor, who has conducted the post-mortem examination of the deceased. P.W.6, Ram Baboo, is the investigating officer of this case.

5. Before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to discuss the evidence of the doctor who has conducted the post mortem examination of the deceased on 1.9.1989 at 3pm. The doctor has found the following injuries on the dead body of the deceased:

(I) Punctured wound 1"x1/2"x penetrating deep into the body situated at right side of back in the middle

(II) Multiple irregular lacerated wound with inverted margin collecting together of the size of about 1 1/2 "x 1 1/2"x penetrating into the chest wall situated on the left side of chest 2" lateral to the left nipple. There was fractured of 4th & 5th ribs laceration of right Lung.

(III) Lacerated wound with inverted margin on 1 1/4" X 1 1/4" situated in the left temporal region penetrating in scalp.

It was the size of 2 1/2" x 2 1/2 " with inverted margin on the temporal region joint adjacent to right ear.

The doctor has opined that injury No. I of Rajendra Sahni was caused by sharp pointed substance whereas Injury