The court emphasized the importance of credible evidence and the need for a complete chain of circumstantial evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

N.K. GUPTA, J.

1. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 24.3.2000 passed by the IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Betul in Special Case No. 42/98 whereby the appellants were convicted for the offence punishable u/s 304 (Part I) of I.P.C or Section 304 (Part I) read with Section 34 of I.P.C and sentenced for 10 years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 3000/-. In default of payment of fine, one years additional rigorous imprisonment to each one of them. Prosecution's case in short is that on 23.8.1998 at about 2.30 p.m, the deceased Ganesh Padmakar, gave a dash to the appellant Murli by his scooter and therefore, the appellant Murli had lodged an FIR Ex.P/3 at the Police Station Betul Bazar. Followed by that accident, at about 5.30 p.m in the evening the appellants traced the deceased Ganesh Padmakar in Bazaar Chowk, Betul in front of the clinic of Dr. Banjare, who was strolling in the market with the complainant Bhojraj (PW3) and Ganesh Dhakde (PW9). The appellant Murli held the hands of the deceased Ganesh Padmakar and the appellant Sanjay Mishra assaulted the deceased Ganesh Padmakar by a dagger on his abdomen and thereafter, both the appellants ran away from the spot. The complainant Bhojraj immediately rushed to the house of his uncle Rajendra Padmakar and informed him about the incident. In the meantime, the deceased Ganesh Padmakar lost his breathes. Thereafter, the complainant Bhojraj had lodged an FIR Ex.P/6 at Police Station Betul Bazaar and a case was registered. A.S.I. K.L. Barde went to the spot and prepared a panchayatnama lash Ex.P/2. Dead body of the deceased was sent for its post mortem to the District Hospital, Betul. Dr. A.K. Pandey (PW16) did the post mortem on the body of the deceased Ganesh Padmakar and gave his report Ex.P/16. He found two stab wounds on his left chest. Fifth left rib was found cut through and through and there were two cuts in the lower lobe of the left lung. The deceased succumbed to the aforesaid injuries.

2. The investigation officer then examined the various witnesses and also arrested the appellants. On the memo Ex.P/8 u/s 27 of the Evidence Act given by the appellant Sanjay, a knife was seized from the stack of bricks situated in front of the clinic of Dr. Banjare and a seizure memo Ex.P/9 was prepared. Samples of earth and blood stained earth were also taken from the spot. Clothes of the deceased were obtained from the hospital. All the seized materials were sent to the forensic science laboratory for their analysis. The Forensic Science Laboratory in its report Ex.P/22 found the blood stains on the garments of the deceased and dagger seized from the appellant Sanjay but, in serological examination it was not established that the blood found on the articles was human blood. After due investigation a charge sheet was filed before the Special Judge under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, Betul. Since at that time entire Sessions Court was notified as a Special Court therefore, the case was transferred to the IInd Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge Betul.

3. The appellants abjured their guilt. They did not take a specific plea in the case but, they have stated that after the incident took place in the noon the deceased Ganesh Padmakar met in the market who, started abusing the appellants and therefore, the appellants went to the Police Station Betul Bazaar for lodging a report against the deceased Ganesh Padmakar. In the meantime, Rajendra Padmakar came to the Police Station who, informed that, the deceased Ganesh Padmakar was killed and thereafter, the appellants were taken into the custody. They were falsely implicated in the crime. In defence Satish Soni (DW1), Vishnu Pandya (DW2) were also examined.

4. After considering the evidence adduced by the parties the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted the appellants from the charge of offence punishable u/s 25 of the Arms Act and Section 302 or 302 read with section 34 of I.P.C but, c