be discarded, more particularly when P.W. 8, an injured witness, has fully supported the case of the prosecution and P.W. 14, the doctor who has given treatment to the injured witness, has also described about the injuries sustained by P.W. 8. At this stage, it is also required to be observed that learned counsel for the appellants has contended that, as per the prosecution-witnesses, there are different places of occurrence. Somebody said that occurrence took place at Darwaza, another said at Baithka, a few others said at Sahan and the Investigating Officer said about the R.C.C. Road. However, if the entire evidence led by the prosecution is closely examined, it can be said that Darwaza, Sahan and R.C.C. Road, which is in front of Baithka, are part of one complex and, further, from the deposition of P.W. 12, the I.O., it can be said that Neem tree is situated in Sahan and near to that there was Verandah ( Osara). P.W. 6 has also said about the Baithka and verandah in his deposition. The dead body was found by the I.O. near the said Neem tree near R.C.C. Road. We are, therefore, of the view that the contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellants with regard to different places of occurrence is misconceived.
