Vipul M. Pancholi, J. – The present criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Code’) challenging the judgment of conviction dated 26.05.2016 and order of sentence dated 30.05.2016, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra in Sessions Trial No. 542 of 2014, arising out of Bheldi P.S. case No. 76 of 2013, G.R. No. 2417/2013, whereby and whereunder the Trial Court has convicted the appellant for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘I.P.C.’) and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 25,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo R.I. for a period of four months.

2. The prosecution case, as emanated from the fardbeyan of the informant Upendra Baitha, the brother of the deceased Seema Devi, recorded by S.I. Sanjay Kumar of P.S. Bheldi, District- Saran on 07.06.2013 at 3.30 P.M. is that the informant on 07.06.2013 received information on his mobile No. 8804823007 that his sister Seema Devi, wife of the accused Shambhu Baitha, was in critical condition. The deceased was married to the accused Shambhu Baitha, resident of village Jhauapatti, P.S.- Bheldi, District- Saran in the year 2002 according to Hindu Law and customs. The deceased was blessed with two sons namely Priyansh Kumar, aged about 5 years, Himanshu Kumar, aged about 2 years and a daughter namely Nibha Kumari, aged about 8 years. On getting information about serious condition of the deceased, the family members of the informant got worried. When the informant reached the matrimonial home of his sister at about 2.30 P.M., he saw that his sister Seema Devi had been burnt to death and the members of her matrimonial family had fled away leaving the dead body in the house. The husband of the deceased, the elder brother of her husband, the wife and the son of the elder brother of her husband used to assault and threaten to cause her death and on the relevant day, they had burnt her to death. The informant claimed that the accused Shambhu Baitha, his brother Kedar Baitha, the wife of Kedar Baitha and Mithilesh Kumar Baitha had caused the death of his sister by setting her on fire.

3. On the basis of fardbeyan of the informant, Bheldi P.S. case No. 76 of 2013 was registered under Section 302/34 of the I.P.C. Thereafter, the Investigating officer carried out the investigation and submitted charge-sheet. On the basis of chargesheet, the Magistrate took cognizance of the case and the case was committed to the Court of Sessions. Charges were framed against the appellant on which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. During the trial, in order to substantiate the charges against the accused person, the prosecution examined as many as eight witnesses, namely, P.W.1 Sheo Dayal Singh, P.W.2 Mukul Kumar Baitha, P.W. 3 Samresh Kumar Singh, P.W.4 Dularchand Baitha, P.W.5 Sanjay Kumar, P.W.6 Nibha Kumari, P.W.7 Upendra Baitha (informant) and P.W. 8 Dr. Shailendra Kumar Singh. In support of the case, the prosecution also produced documentary evidence as Ext. 1- signature of the witness Mukul Kumar Baitha on fardbeyan, Ext. -2 fardbeyan, Ext. -3 map prepared in the case diary, Ext. 4-signature of informant on his fardbeyan, and Ext. 5 is the post-mortem report. The defence has also produced three witnesses namely D.W.1 Bimal Pandit, D.W.2 Manju Devi and D.W.3 Meera Devi. The defence has not produced any document in its support. The statement of the appellant was recorded under section 313 of the Cr.P.C and after conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Court convicted the appellant in the manner stated above.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has mainly submitted that for the alleged occurrence which took place about 12.00 hrs, fardbeyan of the informant was recorded at 15.30 hrs at the place of occurrence. It is submitted that even as per the case of the inform