connection, it is relevant to note that no investigation carried by PW10 and he did not record statements of any witnesses and his knowledge regarding the colour of the stolen coin box is on the basis of the prosecution records. On perusal of the evidence of PW10, he had received the report regarding the arrest of the accused and recovery of the property and thereafter, he had filed the final report. He did not participate either in the recovery and in the preparation of mahazar. It is surprising to note that none of the prosecution records would suggest that MO1 is ‘red’ in colour. In fact, the colour of the stolen coin box and the colour of MO1 is not red, but the same is yellow as described in Ext.P2 and statement by PW7. In fact, the evidence of PW10 could not be the basis to hold that the stolen box was red, since the prosecution witnesses PW6 and PW7 categorically given evidence otherwise and MO1 is in tune with the description, as has been stated in Ext.P2. Apart from that, PW1 and PW3, being officials of the Department also deposed about the theft and identified MO1, as the stolen coin box, with certainty.
