JUDGMENT :

PARTHA SARATHI SEN, J.

1. In this appeal the judgment and order of sentence dated July 30, 2015 as passed by Learned Additional Sessions Judge, 3rd Court, Purulia in Sessions Trial No. 22 of 2014 arising out of Sessions Case no. 40 of 2014 has been assailed. By the impugned judgment and order of sentence learned trial court found the present appellant guilty under Section 302 IPC and thus sentenced him to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/-in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months more. The convict felt aggrieved and thus preferred the instant appeal.

2. For effective disposal of the instant appeal the facts leading to initiation of the aforesaid trial is required to be dealt with in a nutshell.

3. One Sk. Manir, son of Idrish Ansary of Anara Bungalow Side Railway Quarter (Quarter no. E/124/A) lodged a written complaint dated 17.12.2001 with the O/C of Para Police Station stating, inter alia, that on the self same day i.e. on 17.12.2001 at about 9:30 p.m. he went to the quarter of one Zakir Hossain (a neighbour of the de facto complainant). It is his further version that at about 11p.m. he was called by his inmates and when he came out from the quarter of his said neighbour he noticed that his father Idrish Ansary, the appellant herein was standing there in a perplexed condition and at that time his father disclosed to him that he had murdered his daughter, Afsana Khatun by strangulating her by using a rope. It was his further version that immediately thereafter he rushed to his quarter and found his sister Afsana Khatun was lying dead on the cot and at that time blood was oozing from her mouth and the de facto complainant also noticed a rope around her neck. It is the further version of the de facto complainant that after taking information he came to learn that a nylon rope which was fixed on the backside of the verandah of their quarter for drying clothes was used as a weapon of offence. The de facto complainant further disclosed that on being asked his father, Idrish Ansary disclosed that his daughter Afsana used to go outside in the night in a suspicious manner and inspite of all his efforts he failed to rectify his said daughter and thus he punished his said daughter by murdering her by way of strangulation by a rope. It was further averred by the de facto complainant in his said written complaint that thereafter his father disclosed to him that he would be going to Anara Police Station for surrendering himself.

4. On the basis of the said written complaint Para P.S case no. 56 of 2001 dated 18.12.2001 under Section 302 was started. Investigation was taken up and on completion of the same charge sheet under Section 302 IPC was submitted.

5. After commitment and transfer the learned trial court duly considered the entire materials as placed before him and by his order dated August 05, 2015 framed charge under Section 302 IPC as against the accused. Since the accused pleaded his innocence and claimed to be tried the trial proceeded.

6. Trial court record reveals that in order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has examined seven witnesses in all and several documents have been exhibited on their behalf. On behalf of the accused no evidence was adduced. However, from the trend of cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses and the answers as given by the accused in course of his cross-examination under Section 313 Cr.P.C, it reveals that the defence case is based on clear denial and false implication.

7. In order to reach at a logical conclusion of the instant appeal we consider it necessary to discuss the evidence of the prosecution witnesses in a nutshell.

8. PW1 being the scribe of the written complaint became hostile and in course of his cross-examination by the prosecution he categorically denied that the said written complaint was written by him as per instruction of the de facto complainant, Sk. Munir (PW2). He however proved the written complaint as written by him an