Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that informant is not the eye witness of the occurrence, where entire allegation is raised on the basis of suspicion, for the reason that the deceased is alleged to have love affair with the sister of the petitioner. It is submitted that the implication is also based upon self confession of the petitioner, where in furtherance, a ‘gamcha’ was recovered from the back of the house of this petitioner, which is an open place and, as such, cannot be connected, in any manner, with the present occurrence, in want of any scientific evidence. It is further submitted that Call Detail Report (CDR) is of no bearing over the merit of this case. While concluding the argument, it is submitted that petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and, moreover, investigation in this case is complete for which chargesheet has been submitted, as such, there is no chance of tampering with the evidence.