Penal Code, 1860: s 302 rw s. 149 – Dispute between the parties over the pathway, an order of stay obtained by the prime accused and consequential panchayat also held on the date of occurrence – Prime accused along with his son and 25 others got into the land of the victim and other witnesses, and attacked them with weapons – Death of two and injuries to others – Complaint filed by eye-witness – Acquittal of two while conviction of five of them – Acquittal of one more accused by the High Court while upholding the conviction of the other four, and ordered for further investigation u/s 173(8) CrPC – Pursuant thereto, ten more accused added – Conviction and sentence of four accused while one referred to the Juvenile Justice Board, and acquittal of remaining five – Upheld by the High Court – On appeal, held: Evidence adduced is not separable – Common findings rendered to be made applicable to all the accused – There are too many loopholes which cannot be filled up, nor there is any evidence to come to a different conclusion with respect to the offence committed including that of exceeding the right of private defence – When the plea of private defence is taken, the quality of material evidence have to be a bit higher than that of the one required in a normal circumstance – Civil dispute between two groups of villagers turned into a criminal case – Investigation not conducted in a fair manner – Denial of injuries to the accused by the witnesses, though mentioned in the FIR – Place of occurrence also doubtful – Case of over implication by witnesses – Eyewitness’s evidence also does not inspire confidence – View that the evidence of an injured witness has to be placed at a higher pedestal may not apply to a case of private defence with the accused also injured – Furthermore, doctor’s evidence does not support the specific overt act – Genesis and origin of the occurrence and the manner in which it took place are certainly suppressed – Thus, there is unwarranted approach of the prosecution – Order of acquittal upheld – Reasoning adopted for the accused persons acquitted to be applied to the case of the others as well – Thus, accused entitled to the benefit of doubt as imprimatur given to the plea of private defence as possible and plausible with due discharge of onus. ss. 96 to 102 – Private defence – Plea of – Discussed. s. 149 – Scope of – Stated. Motive – Effect of, on prosecution case – Stated. Investigation: Fair Investigation, defective investigation and colourable investigation – Explained. Doctrine/Principle: Falsus in uno-falsus in omnibus – Principle of.