JUDGMENT

Punchhi, J. - Permission to rile special leave petition sought by the mother and brother of the petitioner, Ashok Kumar vide Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 1593 of 1995 is refused. Leave granted to Ashok Kumar, petitioner on his petition from jail.

2. This appeal by Ashok Kumar is to challenge the judgment and order of the Delhi High Court dated January 10, 1995, whereby he has been held guilty for the offence of murder under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to death. His co-accused Smt. Prem Kanwar stands convicted for offence under Section 302/34 IPC, for which she has been sentenced to life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/-, in default of payment of which she has further to undergo 3-1/2 years rigorous imprisonment. Smt. Prem Kanwar has not appealed against her conviction and sentence. So instantly we are only concerned with Ashok Kumar.

3. The prosecution case is woven like this:

Both the accused, Ashok Kumar and Smt. Prem Kanwar belong to the same village in the State of Rajasthan. Both the accused had a long knit physical intimacy with each other. While so Smt. Prem Kanwar was given in marriage to Mahabir Singh, deceased. The marriage made no difference to the intimacy and their relationship continued. Out of the wedlock of Smt. Prem Kanwar, accused with Mahabir Singh deceased, two children were born. The passion between the two lovers, seemingly, did not subside. It is inferred that because of that relationship Ashok Kumar, appellant and his co-accused Smt. Prem Kanwar drew a plot to kill the deceased so that they could be with each other unobstacled. To fulfill that design, it is stated that they moved out or their respective places of residence and jointly came on December 27, 1987 to the house or P.K. Sharma, P.W. 33 at village Kotputli where both the accused persons, the deceased and the two minor children spend a night. Then it is said that this group of people came to Delhi and with the aid of Bajrangi Lal, guide, P.W. 27 came at about 11.00 p.m. on 29-12-1987 to hotel Eagle in Katra Barian, Delhi to seek accommodation. Berorehand, the appellant Ashok Kumar, styling himself as Vijay Kumar had told Bajrangi Lal of their requirement of having a room with three cots. The guide conversely told him that a room with a pair of cols and another with single cot would be made available. Accordingly, the appellant and his companions, on coming to the hotel, were allotted room nos. 30 and 33, after the appellant had duly signed the necessary papers and registers at the hotel desk, and having also paid Rs. 200/- as advance. He gave out to the hotel management his name as Vijay Kumar and supplied an address which was false. Room No. 30 was then occupied by the couple. The same was on the fourth floor of the hotel. Room No. 33 was occupied by the appellant. This was on the top floor. Both the rooms had no attached toilets. Common bathrooms and latrines were available for both the floors i.e. 4th and top floor at the third floor. The following morning at about 9.00 a.m., the appellant and his co-accused Smt. Prem Kanwar were seen standing together in front of room no. 30 and on their asking were served tea by Ram Kumar, P.W. 23. At about 11.00 a.m. the appellants accompanied by his co-accused Smt. Prem Kanwar and her two children left the hotel premises never to return back. It is further traced that on that day itself they left Delhi so as to be in Jaipur where they had checked in at Hotel Sital at about 7.00 p.m. There again the appellant with a pseudo name gave a wrong address. On the new year day, i.e. 1-11988, both of them left together and stayed in a Dharamshala for two days at Kotputly, from where they were ultimately located at Ahmedabad, whereat they were arrested on 12-1-1988.

4. The Hotel management on its part, on routine check, found that room no. 33 lay open. The key and lock of that room lay inside the room. Room No. 30 was however locked by the private lock of the customer. On January 4, 1988