that P.W.8 has admitted at para 12 of his cross-examination that after alleged occurrence, he rushed to the police station but no body was present in the police station and after that he gave his statement to the BDO, Babubarhi block who recorded his statement and took his thumb impression on the aforesaid statement but the prosecution did not bring the aforesaid statement on the record and apart from this, BDO was also not examined and, therefore, non-production of previous statement of P.W.8 as well as non-examination of the concerned BDO was fatal to the prosecution case because nonproduction of first statement of P.W.8 in respect of alleged occurrence has caused serious prejudice to the appellants. He further submitted that except prosecution witness no.8, not a single witness has named the appellants in course of trial and, therefore, in the aforesaid circumstance, the appellants are entitled to get benefit of doubt. He further submitted that Investigating officer as well as other official witnesses were not examined on behalf of the prosecution and apart from this, not a single material exhibit was produced before the court in course of trial. So, the above stated facts are also fatal to the prosecution case.
