11. Amar Singh (P.W.-3) has only stated before the Court that on the date of offence i.e. on 31/12/2013, a fair was held in Salhebhat and he had gone to the fair along with his son-in-law and when he returned to his home in the evening, the appellant was at his home and he asked him to bring some oil. The appellant brought the oil as asked by Amar Singh and thereafter, left his house. After about 20-25 minutes, Ramkuriya Bai (P.W.-8), mother-in-law of deceased Tikeshwari Bai, started shouting on the road that her daughter-in-law had died and called the neighbours as well as village Kotwar. When they went to the house of the deceased, they saw that Tikeshwari Bai was lying dead and thereafter, he along with some villagers and the Kotwar went to the Police Station to lodge a report. A careful scrutiny of the statement of Amar Singh (P.W.-3) would show that he has not helped the case of the prosecution at all as in the beginning itself, he has stated the date of offence to be 31/12/2013 whereas the actual date of offence is 29/12/2013. Furthermore, he is the neighbour of the deceased but no material fact has been brought out by his evidence, as such, reliance could not have been placed upon his testimony and prosecution has failed to prove his as an eye-witness. We hereby discard the testimony of Amar Singh (P.W.-3) as an eyewitness to the incident.
