scientific investigation is crucial and failure of the investigation to complete the investigation on scientific line being non-examination of crime material or materials collected at the alleged crime scene by the Forensic Science Laboratory goes to the root of the case and in such a situation when two views are possible in the absence of scientific test or lab report, which is clinching in such matter, the accused persons are entitled to the benefit of doubt. He submitted that in cases where the accused are suspected to have committed crime on the basis of previous enmity particularly in a case of no eye witness, the standard of proof to convict a person cannot be probability as adopted by the trial court in the instant case and as such he submitted that the entire finding of the trial court is perverse. Referring to the prosecution case, he submitted that from the fardbeyan, it appears that on 09.02.1993 informant‟s son Shyam Mahto, aged about 25 years, had gone to Pupri Bazar on bicycle to select the wood and its rate in the shop of Manoj Chaudhary where the villager Yogendra Mahto works as salesman. The informant has stated in the fardbeyan that after sun set the said Yogendra, salesman in the shop of Manoj Chaudhary came to his place and enquired where is Shyam, son of the informant, then the informant told that he has gone to Pupri Bazar to meet you then Yogendra replied that he has not met Shyam and Yogendra returned back to him and within half an hour returned back and stated that he
