case, the wife and daughter had not gone near the victim, this itself is sufficient to state that both P.W.1 and P.W.2 were not present at the scene of occurrence or the murder might have happened somewhere else, the body alone might have been put near the house. He would also submit that P.W.2 in her examination had deposed that the accused after causing death of the victim had gone to the Police Station, but P.W.1 had deposed that he ran away from the scene of incident, these statements are contradictory and moreover P.W.2 in her cross examination had deposed that she has got married to one Murugan, if that being so there are no chances of the presence of P.W.2 at the scene of incident. Hence the benefit of doubt has to be given to the accused as the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and the judgment of the Court below is liable to be set aside. He would also submit that no material evidence has been led by the prosecution to substantiate the motive alleged. He would also draw the attention of this Court that the relevant material object was not sufficient to cause such injury as that the Medical Officer was not even examined to that aspect.
