Conviction based on the testimony of highly interested ocular witnesses remains unreliable when significant material contradictions exist between their accounts and forensic medical findings. Without corroboration and the examination of the primary investigating officer, the prosecution fails to reach the standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

Pradeep Kumar Srivastava, J.

1. Above two criminal appeals arises out of common judgment of conviction and sentence passed in S.T. No. 103/1999 & 129/1999, hence taken together for hearing and adjudication.

2. Present appeals have been preferred by the appellants against the Judgment of conviction dated 15.02.2003 and order of sentence dated 22.02.2003 passed by 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Garhwa in S.T. No. 103/1999 & 129/1999, whereby and whereunder Sarfuddin Ansari (appellant in Cr.A. (DB) No. 358/2003) has been held guilty for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 120B of the I.P.C. and Nazamuddin Ansari and Mazamuddin Ansari (appellants in Cr.A.(DB) No. 391/2003) have been held guilty for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C. All the three appellants have been sentenced to imprisonment for life and appellant Sarfuddin Ansari is additionally imposed fine of Rs. 5,000/- as default stipulation.

3. The factual matrix giving rise to these appeals in a narrow compass is that on 28.07.1998, one Chhota Sarfuddin (deceased) proceeded from Meral at about 7:45 A.M. by his cycle to railway station Meral for going to Garhwa. It is alleged that informant Immamuddin (P.W.-3) along with his nephew and brother Fakaruddin Ansari (P.W.-5) riding on separate cycle also went to see off Chhota Sarfuddin at railway station. When they crossed about 200 yards from their village, they saw Jalil, Khalil, Khurseed, Raseed, Nabir, Tauhid, Tabib, Futun were sitting near Mahua tree, who were whispering something against the informant. It is further alleged that at about 8:00 A.M., the informant along with his above two associates reached near the field of Salim Mian at Mahuram, then informant saw that Sarfuddin was standing armed with Farsa at a distance of 50 yards towards the western side of road. He also noticed Nazamuddin and Mazamuddin armed with gadasa and dagger respectively also came running and hide themselves behind the Mahuwa tree of Munni Singh. In the meantime, Nazamuddin gave a gadasa blow from back on the neck of the Chhota Sarfuddin, which resulted in half portion cut of neck and he fell down in the field of Salim Mian due to involuntary motion caused from behind. Thereafter, Naseem Ansari (dead) and Karim Ansari came from eastern side with pistol along with Bara Sarfuddin. It is further alleged that Bara Sarfuddin and Nazamuddin caught hold the legs of Chhota Sarfuddin and Nasim (dead) and Karim caught hold of his both hands and pressed him on earth, then Mazamuddin slitted the neck of Chhota Sarfuddin (brother of informant). It is also alleged that Karim and Naseem fired pointing towards informant and Fakaruddin (P.W.-5), which did not hit them and all the accused persons fled away.

The motive behind the occurrence is previous enmity between Chhota Sarfuddin (deceased) and Bara Sarfuddin (appellant in Cr.A. (DB) No. 358/2003) in connection with road contract and due to this enmity one year prior to this occurrence, Bara Sarfuddin attempted to cause murder of Chhota Sarfuddin by assaulting on his neck, but he survived after treatment in Ranchi. The accused persons were threatening to kill the deceased from the happening of the previous occurrence.

4. On the basis of above information, FIR was registered as Meral P.S. Case No. 58 of 1998 for the offen