64. We have gone through the statement of PW-7 SI Vivekanand, Investigating Officer, who has stated that he was present at the Ugu outpost when he got the information of this case at about 6:15 PM. Information was given by villagers. On getting the information he reached at the spot. Thereafter, he received the papers of this case alongwith the first information report at about 08:00 of 08:30 PM. He started preparing inquest report at 08:30 PM but no eyewitness was present there. It is further stated by him that he did not think it proper to inquire about the case under section 25 Arms Act. So far as case under section 25 Arms Act is concerned even if no inquiry was made by the Investigating Officer about that case it can be said to be a defect of the investigation but presence of the injured as well as deceased alongwith PW-4 Ram Singh at the place of occurrence is fully established by the ocular evidence on record. We do not find any reason to disbelieve the statement of PW-1 Ram Swaroop and PW-4 Ram Singh. It is settled legal position that any defect in the investigation cannot extend any benefit in favour of the accused unless and until it is proved that prejudice was caused to

Click Here to Read the rest of this document