SARANG V. KOTWAL, J.

1. By this Appeal, the Appellant has challenged the Judgment and Order dated 04/03/2014 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge for Greater Mumbai, in Sessions Case No.685 of 2007. By the impugned Judgment and Order, the Appellant was convicted for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the IPC and was sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo R.I. for one month. The Appellant was also convicted for the offence punishable under Section 3 read with 25 of the Indian Arms Act and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs.250/- and in default of payment of fine, to suffer R.I. for one month. The Appellant was further convicted for commission of offence under Section 4 read with 27 of the Indian Arms Act and was sentenced to suffer R.I. for three years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- and in default of payment of fine, to suffer R.I. for one month. All the substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.

2. This is another case of a love affair going terribly wrong. The Appellant herein was serving in Navy. In the year 2007, he was posted at INS Garuda, Air Engineering Department, Kochi, Kerala to coordinate and supervise maintenance/repair of aircraft and helicopter. After doing various courses, he was selected to undergo Pilot Simulator (Mechanical) training at Moscow, Russia for MIG-29K aircraft. On 25/02/2007, the Appellant reported at INS Hansa at Goa. There, he was learning Russian language. The prosecution story is that the Appellant developed a love affair with the deceased in this case. She was highly educated. She had done her MBA from Birla Institute of Technology, Ranchi, besides obtaining the degree of MCA in the year 2005. She was working with Tata Consultancy Services at Mumbai and she had undergone training for the company at Trivendram. The prosecution case is that, when the deceased was going to Trivendram by Hawrah-Trivendram Express with her brother Shaunak, she got acquainted with the present Appellant. In the month of September 2005, Shaunak received a call from one Nitu who claimed to be the wife of the Appellant and she informed him that friendship between the Appellant and the deceased had become intimate. Shaunak discussed this fact with the deceased and she had told him that she would not keep any relations with the Appellant. In April 2007, the Appellant called Shaunak and expressed his desire to marry the deceased. Shaunak did not accept his proposal for his sister. On 27/04/2007, the deceased had gone to Jharkhand and had stayed with her family till 08/05/2007. After the deceased returned to Mumbai, the whole affair took a tragic turn. According to the prosecution case, on 12/05/2007 at about 7.00 a.m., the Appellant and the deceased went to hotel Classic Residency in search of a room. On that day, rooms were not available at that hotel and the receptionist made inquiries with another hotel Sun-N-Sheel for vacant rooms. On getting a positive response, he sent the Appellant and the deceased to hotel Sun-N-Sheel. The couple reached there at about 7.30 a.m. and were allotted Room No.202. The prosecution case is that the watchman of Sun-N-Sheel hotel had seen the couple when they had arrived there. The Appellant filled the entry card of the hotel in his own handwriting. His name was entered in the register. The evidence shows that the room was occupied by the couple on 12/05/2007 and 13/05/2007. In the afternoon on 13/05/2007, a waiter had given them lunch and had accepted the bill amount for the same. Thereafter, nobody from hotel Sun-N-Sheel had seen the couple or had heard anything from their room. At about 1.00 p.m. on 14/05/2007, the Accountant Anup Lal of hotel Sun-N-Sheel received a message from the reception counter that nobody was responding to the calls in Room No.202 and nobody was opening the door. Anup Lal then asked the housekeeping supervi