show that involvement of accused was not afterthought, (3) to use it as evidence as to conduct of informant under section 8 of the Evidence Act. It is the rule of law that, FIR is the vital and valuable piece of evidence and on account of delay, it would not only gets bereft of the advantage of spontaneity, but danger creeps in of introduction of coloured version, or exaggerated account or concocted story as a result of deliberation and consultation. The object of insisting upon prompt lodging of F.I.R. to police in respect of commission of crime is to obtain early information regarding the circumstances in which the offence was committed, the names of actual assailants, and the role played by each of them, etc. In case, there was delay in F.I.R., it should be satisfactorily explained and if it is not properly explained, it would be unsafe to base conviction on the basis of this delayed F.I.R. In the matter in hand, there was colossal delay of more than 10 to 12 hours to lodge FIR since occurrence of alleged incident. Obviously, it would create doubt about truthfulness of the evidence of PW-3 Laxman and his wife Vimalbai. There was no plausible explanation on the part of prosecution witnesses for delay in lodging the FIR. The conduct and demeanor of key witness of the prosecution appears suspicious and against the human behavioural pattern. If in reality the alleged incident would have taken place in the wee hours of morning, PW-3 Laxman and his wife Vimalbai should have ventilated the grievance against the accused to the onlookers, denizens, passerby, etc., Moreover, there were no efforts to shift their injured daughter Shilavati to the hospital for medical treatment at the earliest. They maintained silence uptill 9.00 p.m. and thereafter the PW-3
