ORDER

The Appellants in this case were charge-sheeted, 1st Appellant for the offence under Section 302 and 2nd Appellant for the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code. 1st Appellant - Darshan Singh is the son of 2nd Appellant - Mahendra Singh. Both were convicted under the offences charged against each of them and A-1 was sentenced to imprisonment for life while A-2 was sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 4 years and a fine of Rs. 200/-. A Division Bench of the High Court confirmed the conviction and sentence and dismissed the appeal filed by them.

2. The case of the prosecution is that 1st accused - Darshan Singh murdered Smt. Jasbir Kaur who was the wife of A-2 s brother-Wadhava Singh on the morning of 4.12.1976.

3. There is no eye-witness to the occurrence. Therefore, the prosecution rested entirely on circumstantial evidence. It is a rare case in which there is not even medical evidence to show the cause of death of the deceased. However, prosecution has proved beyond doubt that the death of Smt. Jasbir Kaur was a case of homicide. She was aged 22 when she died. Till she died she was quite healthy. The dead body of Jasbir Kaur was cremated in a hurry even before the kith and kin of Jasbir Kaur were informed of her death. The hasty disposal of the dead body to flames and the antecedent sufferings which deceased had undergone persuaded her father PW 12 - Mehar Singh to lodge a complaint with the police after about 4 days. The police took up investigation into the matter and collected materials. Finally, the case was charge-sheeted against the accused for the offences mentioned above.

4. We have scrutinised the materials in order to verify whether the circumstances presented by the prosecution have been proved satisfactorily. We are in agreement with the two courts below that the circumstances so presented formed a completed chain which unerringly pointed to A-1-Darshan Singh as the murderer of Jasbir Kaur. Circumstances also pointed to the guilt of A-2-Mahendra Singh for destruction of evidence of the offence by consigning the dead body to flames before the authorities could conduct any examination thereon.

5. For the aforesaid reasons, we are not inclined to interfere. Appeal is accordingly dismissed.

(C.R.) Appeal dismissed.

**************