Shalini Phansalkar-Joshi, J.

1. The Appellant, who stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs.1,000/-, in default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of two months, and further convicted for the offence punishable under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs.500/-, in default to undergo further imprisonment of one month, by the Judgment dated 5th May, 2005 in Sessions Case No.138 of 2004, by the 3rd Ad-Hoc Additional Sessions Judge, Malegaon, by this Appeal, challenges his conviction and sentence.

2. Facts, as are necessary, for deciding this Appeal can briefly be stated thus:-

The marriage of Kamini, daughter of PW-1 Bhivsan Shankar Pawar and his wife PW-2 Kalabai, was performed with the Appellant about four years prior to the incident. As Kamini had no issue out of the wedlock, the Appellant used to harass and ill-treat her. Just few days before the incident, she had also approached PW-5 Dr. Mukund Karambalkar for taking medical treatment to conceive the child. In this fact situation, on 14th July, 2004, at about 5 am, she was found strangulated and burnt in the house of the Appellant. The information thereof was given to PW-7 ASI Pandurang Shewale by PW-9 Bhivsan Shewale, the neighbour of the Appellant.

3. On this information, A.D. No.15 of 2004 was registered. PW-7 ASI Shewale then went to the spot and conducted Inquest Panchanama (Exhibit-24). He sent dead body of Kamini to Wadia Hospital for postmortem examination. Thereafter, he conducted the Spot Panchanama (Exhibit-15) in the presence of the Panchas PW-3 Bapu Pawar and PW-4 Somnath Wadage. From the spot, he collected the plastic can without the lid, the match-box and some pieces of clothes.

4. On the very day, on the complaint of Kamini's father PW-1 Bhivsan Pawar, Head Constable Karke registered C.R. No.55 of 2004 against the Appellant and handed over investigation of the said C.R. No.55 of 2004 to PW-11 API Nawale. He recorded the statements of the witnesses including PW-2 Kalabai, Kamini's mother, PW-9 Bhivsan Shewale and PW-10 Supabai Shinde, the neighbours of the Appellant. He arrested the Appellant, collected the Postmortem Notes (Exhibit-26) and after completion of due investigation, filed Charge-Sheet in the Court against the Appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 302 and 201 of the IPC.

5. On the case being committed to the Sessions Court, the Trial Court framed charge against the Appellant vide Exhibit-7. The charge was read over and explained to the Appellant. The Appellant denied the guilt and claimed trial, raising the defence of simple and total denial.

6. To prove its case, the Prosecution examined altogether eleven witnesses. Out of them, PW-1 Bhivsan Pawar and PW-2 Kalabai Pawar, the parents of deceased Kamini, turned hostile and not supported the Prosecution case. As a result, Trial Court acquitted the Appellant for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the IPC, whereas, convicted and sentenced him for the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 201 of the IPC, as stated above.

7. This Judgment of the Trial Court is the subject matter of this Appeal. We have heard Mr. Purwant, the learned Counsel for the Appellant, and Smt. Bhosale, the learned A.P.P. for the Respondent-State. In our considered opinion, in order to effectively deal with their rival submissions, it would be useful to refer to the evidence on record.

Homicidal Death

8. The case of the Prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence. The first and foremost circumstance on which the Prosecution has placed reliance is the homicidal death of Kamini. To prove this circumstance, the Prosecution has placed reliance on the evidence of PW-8 Dr. Bhimrao Tribhuwan, who was, at the relevant time, attached to Wadia Hospital as Medical Officer. On the requisition of Police, he has conducte