salwar. Thus, there were 3 different versions, regarding the colour of the salwar, one by PW­1 that it was red, the second by PW­3 that it was black color spotted and the third by PW­6 that it was green colored. Similarly, there were two different versions regarding the presence of blood on the salwar, one by PW­1 and another by PW­6. 55. A letter dated 27.03.2012 purportedly sent by the Deputy Superintendent of Police to the Forensic Sciences Laboratory, which formed part of the documents submitted by the police, presumably along with the final report, but which was not marked as Exhibit indicates that the salwar worn by the deceased, with stains of semen on it, was one of the few items sent for forensic examination. But there was no report of the Forensic Sciences Laboratory. 56. Strangely, the aforesaid letter dated 27.03.2012 addressed to the Forensic Sciences Laboratory, was not sent by the Investigation Officer but by the Deputy Superintendent of Police. 57. Thus there were very serious contradictions, both mutual and otherwise, in the evidence tendered by PWs 1 to 3, on crucial aspects such as, (i) the mode of Lodging of the FIR; (ii) the place 26