The evidence of PW-2 was in line with F.I.R. and his statement given to the police. Apart from minor discrepancies which are bound to appear in a natural course of conduct of a normal human being, there were no serious material discrepancies in the evidence in order to completely discard their evidence. There is no reason to doubt the credibility of all these witnesses. There is no reason why they would falsely try to implicate the appellant. Nothing was shown on record that these witnesses were having strained relations with the appellant. On the other hand, it was clearly made out from the evidence that they were having cordial relations and were visiting each other quite often. [Paras 27 and 29] [1094-B-E] 2. It is manifest from the evidence that the appellant had got himself admitted in Civil Hospital on 4.3.2005 and was under treatment. According to the doctor PW-10, the appellant was admitted on 4.2.2005 at about 6.30 a.m. and was discharged on 7.3.2005. The doctor was not able to conclusively say that any Sulphas tablet was taken by the appellant or not. He deposed that after taking tablets, it is difficult to survive for a long period. Appellant did not offer any explanation as to where was he before his admission in the hospital on the fateful day. Plea of alibi taken by him was not found to be truthful as the same stood falsified from the evidence of PW-4 who had sIndian Penal Code, 1860een him coming out of his own house at 5.00 a.m. This was only indicative of the fact that after commission of the alleged crime, he got himself admitted in the Civil Hospital. It is certain that he had committed the crime sometime in night and then got himself admitted in the hospital at 6.30 a.m. Looking to the totality of the facts and features of the case and keeping in view the evidence available on record, there is no doubt that the offence was committed by the appellant only. 

Indian Penal Code, 1860