Wrong version of the complainant was recorded by the investigating agency with a view to allow the real culprits to go escort free and to involve innocent person in the commission of the offence or complainant in order to misguide the investigation lodged false..

 2003 S C M R 1419

First Information Report under S.154, Cr.P.C. is normally considered as a corner stone of the prosecution case unless it is shown that on account of some mala fide intention a wrong version of the complainant was recorded by the investigating agency with a view to allow the real culprits to go escort free and to involve innocent person in the commission of the offence or complainant in order to misguide the investigation lodged false, report i.e. F.I.R. or supplementary statement with ulterior motive.

Supplementary statement by the complainant---Value---Supplementary statement of the complainant is not more than a statement under S.161, Cr:P.C.

S.174---Police Rules, 1934, R.25.35(1)---Inquest report is prepared when the investigation has been completed.

Chance witness ---Credibility--Conditions---Evidence of chance witness would be acceptable subject to establishing his presence at the place of incident---When no corroborative evidence was available to support the version of a chance witness the same had to be excluded from consideration.

Tainted piece of evidence cannot furnish corroboration to another piece of tainted evidence.

-Wajtakkar type of witness was always treated to be a chance witness and his presence could be accepted if he/she could establish his/her presence at the place of incident but in the absence of such explanation the prosecution was bound to place on record some strong evidence to corroborate his/her statements--Evidence of Wajtakkar type of witness could be doubted on number of reasons including his own residence and acquaintance of the witnesses with the accused.

Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1884), Art.40---Reappraisal of evidence---When any fact was deposed as discovered in consequence of information received from a person accused of any offence, in the custody of a police officer so much of such information (whether the same amounted to a confession or not), as related distinctly to the fact thereby discovered, be proved---Statement of accused before police is admissible if an accused person stated that a weapon of offence was lying at a particular place and he produced the same, that portion would be admissible but if he stated that the weapon with which he killed the deceased would be produced by him, such statement was inadmissible--Principles.

Medical evidence ---Postmortem---Supreme Court desired that, in all criminal cases, at the time of post-mortem the concerned doctor should get the blood group of the deceased determined from the Chemical Analyser for future use during investigation and trial of the case.

S.164---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.39---Confession--Voluntariness/retraction---Test---Principles---Court has to satisfy itself that the accused got recorded a true confessional statement---If the confession was retracted and was alleged to have been obtained under coercion, before believing the same it was imperative to examine as to whether same was corroborated by other evidence on material points--Where such corroboration was not available, confessional statement would be inadmissible.

When the prosecution. possesses no incriminating evidence against an accused then his statement/version under S.342, Cr.P.C. has to be believed in toto.