SCC Online Web Edition, © 2022 EBC Publishing Pvt. Ltd. Page 9 Monday, October 24, 2022 Printed For: Navami Krishnamurthy, Jindal Global University SCC Online Web Edition: http://www.scconline.com © 2022 EBC Publishing Pvt.Ltd., Lucknow. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- with Manju. However, what is important in the evidence of the PW-1 is that from the time the PW-1 reached the police station till the last the accused appellant was at the police station under the surveillance of the police. 32. The prosecution has examined the PW-2, Chhatrapal Raidas. The PW-2 happens to be the brother of the deceased Sangeeta Devi. In his examination in chief, he has deposed about the extra marital affair of the accused appellant with Manju. He has also deposed that ten days before the incident, Sangeeta had visited his house and had narrated about the harassment that was meted towards her by the accused appellant. In his cross examination, he has deposed that he came to know about the incident at 7 o'clock in the morning through Ramanand. According to the PW-2, Ramanand had visited his house and was informed that his wife and four children were burning in the house. According to the PW-2, the accused appellant saying so left his house. The PW-2 has further deposed in his cross examination that Pratap and PW-1, Shambhu Raidas were to be seen at the house of the accused appellant dousing the fire with water. He has deposed that villagers were standing outside the house of the accused appellant. He has deposed that the clothes of Ramanand were soaked with blood. After sometime, the Police Inspector reached the place of incident. The PW-2 has deposed that between 8 A.M. and 9 A.M. the police took the accused appellant to the police station. He has deposed that within no time, it was confirmed that none else but Ramanand-accused appellant was the assailant. 33. What emerges from the evidence of the PW-2 is that the accused appellant was in an extra marital relationship with Manju and desperately wanted to get married to Manju. Because of the extra marital affair, Sangeeta was being harassed by the accused appellant. However, what is important to note in the evidence of the PW-2 is that Ramanand had visited his house also at 7 o'clock in the morning. The PW-2 also saw Pratap and PW-1, Shambhu Raidas at the house of the accused appellant trying to douse the fire with water. One important feature of the deposition of the PW-2 is that the accused appellant was taken away by the police between 8 A.M. and 9 A.M. on the day of the incident. 34. The prosecution has examined the PW-3, Babu Ram Hans to prove the extra judicial confession. The PW-3 in his examination in chief has deposed that on 23.01.2010 while he was at his house, the accused appellant came about 9 o'clock in the morning and informed about the incident. According to the PW-3, the accused appellant is said to have confessed before him of having brutally killed his wife and four minor children. According to the PW-3, the accused appellant sought his help as the PW-3 was a leader of the BSP ruling party at the relevant point of time. However, the PW-3 declined to help the accused appellant in any manner. The PW-3 has deposed that he had narrated to the police inspector about the confession said to have been made before him by the accused appellant and his statement was also recorded by the police. The PW-3 in his cross examination has deposed that his village is at the distance of 30 to 35 kilometres from Naamdar Purwa. 35. We shall explain as to how we are not inclined to believe the evidence of the PW -3, Babu Ram Hans a little later in our judgment. 36. The prosecution has examined the PW-4, Ram Kumar son of Paanchoo. It is the case of the prosecution that even before the PW-4, the accused appellant had made an extra judicial confession about the crime. The PW-4 in his examination in chief has deposed that at the relevant time, he was the member of the District Panchayat of BSP. He has deposed that on the very day i.e. 22.01.2010 at 6 : 30 in the morning Ramanand came to his house and informed that his wife and children had been assaulted and set on fire. The PW-4 told the accused appellant that he would help him provided he would tell the truth. According to the PW-4, thereafter the accused appellant confessed before him that he had killed his wife and children as he wanted