observed that the case of the prosecution through so-called eyewitnesses is specific that the occurrence took place at about 11:45 a.m. and it is not in dispute that the post mortem was conducted at 04:40 p.m. i.e. after about 5 hours from the time of occurrence and it is specific case of the expert that the time of death is about 16-24 hours. We are of the view that the said medical evidence does not support the case of the prosecution and, more particularly, the deposition given by the so-called eye-witnesses is not trustworthy. We have already discussed hereinabove that the conduct of the informant, who is the son of the deceased, is not natural. As per the case of the informant, the injured was immediately taken to the hospital on the motorcycle by the witnesses and when they reached to the hospital, it was found that the injured had succumbed to the injuries. Therefore, inquest report was prepared immediately, at about 14.20 hours. Though, the so-called eye-witnesses i.e. the informant and PW-2, Deepu Singh, the FIR was not lodged in the hospital nor the names of the assailants were disclosed to the police immediately and, surprisingly and shockingly, the FIR was lodged at the house of the informant at about 07:00 p.m. and it is the specific case of the private-respondents/accused that they have been falsely implicated. Thus, in the facts of the present case, the deposition of the doctor, who is an independent witness and an
