JUDGMENT :

This appeal is filed challenging the Judgment and order of acquittal dated 08.08.2013 passed in S.C.No.96/2012 on the file of Fast Track Court, Sagar for the offence punishable under Sections 302, 201, 490 and 404 of IPC.

2. The factual matrix of the case is that, on 02.12.2011 at about 6:00 to 6:30 in the morning, in the land bearing survey No.48/1 of Kerodi village, Sagar Taluk, the accused who was working as coolie in the Garden House of father of the complainant, with an ulterior motive to murder the father of the complainant and to sell the agricultural equipments and the property to some other persons and to earn money illegally the accused with the iron rod hit on his head, as a result the victim had sustained injuries and succumbed to the injuries. The accused in order to avoid the punishment and to escape from the clutches of law buried the dead body on the western side in the garden land of the victim. The son of the victim at the first instance gave the complaint for missing of his father and when the accused was apprehended the body was recovered at his instance and case was registered and further investigated the matter and recoveries were also made and after completion of the investigation the police have filed the charge sheet for the above offences.

3. The accused did not plead guilty before the Trial Court and he claims the Trial and hence prosecution has examined PWs1 to 25 to prove its case and also got marked the documents Ex.P1 to Ex.P.50 and produced MOs.1 to 47. The Trial Court after considering the evidence of the prosecution examined the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and thereafter the accused did not choose to lead any defense evidence. The Trial Judge after considering both oral and documentary evidence comes to the conclusion that the prosecution fails to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and passed an order of acquittal and hence, the present appeal is filed.

4. The State in this appeal would contend that, the impugned order of acquittal recorded by the Trial Judge is contrary to law and the reasons assigned while passing the Judgment of acquittal reached at wrong conclusion which has resulted substantial miscarriage of justice. The appreciation of evidence is not in proper perspective. The Trial Judge also has not raised proper probabilities and inferences on the basis of the evidence available on record.

5. The Trial Judge has failed to appreciate the evidence of PW1 to 4 and also the evidence of 5 to 10 and PWs.11 to 16 and other official witnesses who have been examined as PWs.17 to 19, 21, 24 and 25 and hence it requires the interference of this Court.

6. The learned counsel appearing for the state in his argument he vehemently contended that the accused was working with the deceased and the dead body was unearthed at the instance of the accused. The witnesses who have been examined before the Trial Court have supported the case of the prosecution that agricultural equipments of the deceased were sold to them. The recoveries are proved by examining the witnesses and nothing elicited from the mouth of those witnesses to disbelieve the case of the prosecution.

7. The doctor who has been examined as PW22 has categorically deposed that the injuries sustained by the victim are antimortem in nature and he has sustained injuries to his brain and hence he was succumbed to the injuries. The prosecution has made out that cause of death was due to injuries to brain and it is a homicidal one. The accused was staying along with the deceased and Section 106 of Evidence Act attracts since death was taken place in the house wherein the accused was staying with the victim. The accused has not given any explanation in his 313 statement which was recorded by the Trial Court. The Trial Court in spite of all this materials available before the Court failed to appreciate the same in a proper perspective and hence, it requires interference of this Court.

8. Per contra, the counsel appearing for the de