( 1. ) IN broad daylight, on 7-2-1981, Kedar was shot at and killed. Eye-witnesses have deposed against the appellant and the question is whether they are to be believed. The question also is if there is any other evidence on which the verdict returned by the trial Court against the appellant on the charge of murder of kedar can be sustained.

( 2. ) THE appellants defence is that he is falsely implicated and by none else than his own brother who has deposed in this case as P. W. 6. Indeed, he examined defence witness also who deposed having witnessed the occurrence and has named the culprit as one Babu Kachhi of village Kohar, since deceased. However, we are required, primarily, to assess the prosecution evidence and answer the question if prosecution has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.

( 3. ) IT is necessary first to indjcate some salient features of the investigation of the case because appellants grievance is that he has been framed up and investigation has been partisan and not open, independent and impartial. Not only eye-witnesses, appellants counsel Shri Gupta has submitted, all the key-witnesses are members of the same family and no independent witness has been