sentence through this appeal by special leave. Submissions on behalf of the appellant: - 18. Learned legal aid counsel appointed by Supreme Court Legal Services Committee(SCLSC) for representing the appellant 9advanced extensive submissions to assail the impugned judgment. He urged that:- (i) The trial Court as well as the High Court committed grave factual error in holding that complainant Ashok Kumar Pathak was examined on oath in proceedings under Section 299 CrPC. As per learned counsel, this finding is totally contrary to the record because the statement of complainant Ashok Kumar Pathak relied upon by the trial Court and the High Court is actually the statement of the said witness recorded by the SHO, PS Bhajan Pura under Section 161 CrPC which was proved by the Investigating Officer(PW- 13) in proceedings under Section 299 CrPC. (ii) The confession note(Exhibit PW-12/E) is a fabricated piece of evidence because the prosecution did not make any endeavour to get the two admitted