1. The sole appellant has been convicted for the charge under Sec.302 read with Sec.34 of the IPC and awarded RI for life on that count and also a fine of Rs. 5000.00 or in default to undergo further RI for two years. He has also been convicted of charge under Sec.201, IPC for which he has been awarded RI for three years and a fine of Rs. 1000.00 or in default further RI for one year.

2. From the materials on record and the deposition of witnesses it appears that Kasba PS Case No. 109/1989 was lodged on 20-6-1989 by PW-5 Lakhi Prasad Chourasia, father of one of the deceased in this case, Kamlesh Kumar Chourasia. According to prosecution case the aforesaid Kamlesh Chourasia aged about 15 years and another boy Bhulla Prasad Chourasia aged about 18 years, son of Hira Lal Chourasia (PW-9) became traceless on 2-6-1989 for which some information was given to the Police Station also later on. On 20-6-1989 at the instance of Lakhi Prasad Chourasia some villagers including PW-7. Md. Tamizuddin went to verify rumor that both the missing boys have been killed by accused, Pawan Kumar Chourasia (appellant) and some other persons. On interrogation at his house allegedly the appellant disclosed before the villagers that he, his brother Upendra Kumar Chourasia, Pankaj Chourasia, Pradeep Chourasia and Mithilesh Chourasia had strangulated the two deceased by using force of towel on their neck and thereafter the dead bodies had been buried in the field of Bhagirath situated at Nakkibari. According to the prosecution case all the persons and villagers present were taken to the place of burial by the appellant, Pawan Kumar Chourasia and at the place shown by him the dead bodies were recovered from under the ground. After the dead bodies were recovered PW-6 along with some others went to the Police Station where the fardbeyan was recorded on 20-6-1989 at 1700 hours. It appears that after investigation chargesheet was submitted leading to trial of this appellant, Pawan Kumar Chourasia and four others. They pleaded not guilty to the charges and were tried leading to conviction of the appellant by the impugned judgment and order. By the same judgment and order four others were acquitted of similar charges on account of lack of reliable evidence against them. In order to prove the charges the prosecution examined. 10 witnesses in total. PW-1, Radhey Shyam Mandal, PW-2, Jagdish Prasad Chaurasia, PW-3, Shobha Lal Mandal, PW-4, Kishan Lal Mandal, PW-5, Lakhi Prasad Chourasia (informant) and PW-6, Satya Narain Mandal have been declared hostile and have been cross-examined by the prosecution also. The witnesses on whom prosecution has placed full reliance are PW-7, Md. Tamizuddin. PW-8, Luchai Mandal who is uncle of one of the deceased, Bulla Prasad Chourasia and PW- 9, Hira Lal Chourasia who is father of the aforesaid deceased. PW-10, Dr. R. D. Raman has claimed to have held autopsy of the bodies of the two deceased and the postmortem reports of deceased, Kamlesh Kumar Chourasia and deceased. Bulla Prasad Chourasia have been proved and marked as Exhibits 2 and 2/1 respectively.

3. Exhibit-1 series are documentary evidence by way of signatures of witnesses on the FIR, seizure list as well as Inquest reports.

4. On behalf of the appellant it has been submitted that the prosecution case should not have been accepted as true when the informant PW-6 has turned hostile and chosen not to support the earliest version of the prosecution. The other submission is that conviction of the appellant is based only upon alleged extrajudicial confession made by him before villagers and no sanctity to such alleged confession should have been accorded when only PW-7, Md. Tamizuddin is named in the FIR as one of the witnesses of such extra judicial confession and there is no mention of the names of PW-8 and 9 in the fardbeyan.

5. The next submission is that on account of the decomposed state, it was not possible for the witnesses to identify the dead bodies recovered f