speaking terms with each other. He is also the witness of last seen occurrence. He further stated in his examination-in-chief, that on 6.9.2016, at about 6 PM, the appellant-accused visited his house in a perplexed condition and he admitted that he committed the murder of deceased due to his previous grudge, by causing injuries to him with kapa on his head, he has committed a blunder mistake and asked him to sort out the matter with the family of the deceased. He was put to cross-examination. During cross-examination, he changed his version and stated that the accused came to his village on 5.9.2016. He admitted that he did not meet the accused on 6.9.2016. Rather he specifically stated that on 6.9.2016, he had no talk with accused Swaran Singh nor he met him on that day. Further-more, the present accused is a relative of deceased Gurtej Singh, therefore, there was no reason for the accused person to approach the relative of the deceased, to suffer extra judicial confession. Had the accused made extra judicial confession on 6.9.2016, as stated by this witness, in his examination-in-chief or on 5.9.2016, as stated in crossexamination, there was no reason for him to wait and not inform the police immediately. Rather his statement was recorded on 7.9.2016. The delay in recording his statement, to our opinion, is fatal and thus, the same cannot be relied upon. The next witness who was examined by the prosecution is PW3 Bhola Singh. As per this witness, Swaran Singh accused-appellant along with his brother-inlaw Roop Singh visited his house and narrated the entire incident. He further stated that the accused admitted that he has committed a
