2013 and 2nd October, 2013 as well, but the witness (PW-9) did not divulge the vital information to the police that he had seen the child with the dog in the vicinity of watchmen chawl and the accused appellant coming out of the bushes. Apparently, thus, the conduct of the witness in maintaining stoic silence and not divulging to the police at the first available opportunity that he had seen the child victim in the afternoon of 30th September, 2013, or that he had seen the accused appellant coming out from the bushes makes his entire testimony doubtful. 45. As is borne out from the record, the statement of this witness (PW-9) was recorded by the Mandar Vasant Dharmadhikari (PW-18), the Investigating Officer, under Section 161 of the CrPC on 3rd October, 2013. Hence, the conduct of the witness (PW-9), in remaining indifferent and failing to disclose the vital fact of having seen the accused appellant and the 35 Criminal Appeal No(s). 1954-1955 of 2022