T.V. Nalawade, J.

The appeal is filed against the judgment and order of Sessions Case No.72 of 1997, which was pending in the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Nanded. The Trial Court has convicted and sentenced the Appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Both the sides are heard.

3. Deceased Balaji was unmarried youngster and he was the son of first informant Irba Shinde, who is the resident of Hasapur, Taluka Bhokar. Balaji was in search of work. One Datta Mang, whose native place is Hasapur, is working in Mumbai and Balaji went to Mumbai for getting work with the help of Datta. He left village on 25th August, 1996.

4. In Mumbai, the present Appellant, who is resident of same village, approached Balaji and gave false information to Balaji that his father and brother were injured and Balaji needs to return to Hasapur immediately. Accused took Balaji with him. Datta Mang helped both Balaji and present Appellant-Accused Pandurang in boarding the train for Nanded and he saw to it that both together boarded the same train for Nanded.

5. Balaji and Appellant left Mumbai on the night of 2nd September, 1996. Somebody contacted Datta to make inquiry about Balaji and Appellant and due to that, Datta contacted a xerox shop owner of Bhokar, who had telephone facility and requested him to give message to the first informant Irba that Balaji and present Appellant had left Mumbai together for the village. As Balaji had not reached village till 5th September, 1996 when he ought to have reached on 3rd September, 1996 itself, Irba became anxious and he contacted after 08:00 pm on 5th September, 1996 to Datta on phone. Irba had taken with him some villagers. It was informed to Irba by Datta that on the night of 2nd September, 1996, Balaji had left Mumbai with Appellant for village. After getting specific information from Datta, Irba and others returned to village from Bhokar to make inquiry with Appellant. On 5th September, 1996 in the night time, when Irba and others made inquiry with Appellant, initially he gave evasive answers. He, first informed that Balaji was with his company upto Nasik and at Nasik Balaji had left his company. When Irba and the persons of village told Appellant that they had specific information from Datta that he had purchased tickets for both Balaji and Appellant for Nanded and there was no reason for Balaji to take a halt at Nasik and when they said that Pandurang, Appellant was supplying false information, the Appellant admitted to Irba and others that Balaji had kept illicit relations with the wife of Appellant and due to that he was angry with Balaji. He further informed that due to this anger and the relationship, he picked up Balaji at Mumbai and he took Balaji to Nanded and from there by other train, he had brought Balaji to Umri. He disclosed that he wanted to take Balaji to Sawargaon and they had boarded a jeep for that, but on the road of Sawargaon, Balaji said that he was not ready to go to Sawargaon and so from that point on foot they started for village. He disclosed that in Kamangaon, he took Balaji to Government land where there was nursery and forest and there he finished Balaji by strangulating him by using towel. He disclosed that he had left the dead body near a tree. This information was given in the late hours of the night. Irba went to Bhokar Police Station on 6th September, 1996 and gave report. On the basis of this report, Crime No.218 of 1996 came to be registered in Bhokar Police Station at 08:30 am.

6. On 6th September, 1996, Police took Appellant in custody. While in police custody, in the presence of Irba, Panch witnesses and others, the Appellant gave the statement to police that he had kept the dead body of Balaji in Shivar of Kamangaon. The Appellant then took Police, Panchas and others to the spot where he had kept the dead body. Irba also went with them as the dead body was to be identified. Appellant took police and these persons to a sm