Sunil Kumar Sinha, J.

[1] These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 31-1-2009 passed in Sessions Trial No. 5/2008 by the First Additional Session Judge, Baloda Bazar, District Raipur (C.G.). By the impugned judgment, the appellants have been convicted u/S. 302/34, IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 500/- with default sentence of R.I. for 2 months. The facts, briefly stated, are as under:--

Deceased- Sangeeta, aged about 25 years, was a deserted lady. She was residing with her father, Sriram Verma (PW-1) in village Latuwa. The dead body of the deceased was seen by the villagers in the bayara (badi) of accused - Khamhan Singh on 23-10-2007. It was in highly burnt condition. Babulal (PW-12- village Kotwar) lodged the merg intimation (Ex. P/19). The Investigation Officer reached to the place of occurrence, gave notice (Ex. P/1) to the Panchas and prepared inquest (Ex. P/2) on the dead body of the deceased. The dead body was identified by Shriram Verma (PW-1). It was sent for postmortem to Govt. Hospital, Baloda Bazar vide requisition Ex P/20-A. The post-mortem examination was conducted by Dr. Pramod Kumar Tiwari (PW-13) who prepared his report Ex. P/20. He found that the dead body was in extensive burnt condition; the burns were skin deep; hairs were completely burnt; tongue was protruded; only the sole of the foot was not burnt; and smell of kerosene was coming out from the body. The Autopsy Surgeon opined that the deceased died due to asphyxia caused by 100% partial to full thickness burn (whole body); duration was 6-12 hours. However he could not give any opinion as to whether the death was homicidal or suicidal. Pieces of liver, spleen, kidney, lungs and stomach were preserved for chemical analysis, but no report relating thereto could be filed.

In further investigation, the appellants were taken into custody and their memorandum statements u/S. 27 of the Evidence Act were recorded. Momorandum statement of accused Khamhan (Ex. P/7) was recorded on 26-10-2007 and a plastic jerry-cane having 2 & 1/2 liters of kerosene was seized at his instance vide seizure memo Ex. P/8. A mobile set of phone No. 99268-86190 was also seized from the possession of accused Khamhan Singh on 25-10-2007 vide seizure memo Ex. P/15. Another mobile-set of phone No. 99778-74188 was seized from the possession of Shriram (PW-1) vide seizure memo Ex. P/6. Another mobile set of phone No. 99772-10203 was seized from the possession of accused No. 3, Hemant Kumar, vide seizure memo Ex. P/16. Further another mobile set of phone No. 97542-14120 was seized from the possession of Dushyant Yadav (PW-7) vide seizure memo Ex. P/14. Call details of these mobile sets were also taken out vide Ex. P/23.

The case of the prosecution was that Khamhan Singh (A-1) had illicit relations with the deceased; Khamhan Singh was talking to the deceased on mobile-set prior to the incident; a quarrel had taken place between the deceased and the accused persons 3-4 days prior to the incident; a report of the said quarrel was also lodged in the police station; and for all these reasons, the deceased was called in the bayara (badi) of accused Khamhan Singh and she was burnt by accused persons by pouring kerosene on her.

[2] Admittedly, there was no eye-witness to the incident and the case of the prosecution was based on circumstantial evidence. Following are the circumstances, on which, the learned Session Judge relied and held that it was proved beyond all reasonable doubts that the appellants committed murder of the deceased by putting her on fire after pouring kerosene on her body:--

(i) Khamhan Singh (A-1) had illicit relations with the deceased.

(ii) 4 days prior to the date of incident, a quarrel and marpit had taken place between the accused persons and the deceased and a report was lodged.

(iii) Khamhan Singh (A-1) and Hemant Kumar (A-3) had talked with the deceased on mobile-sets prior to the date of the incident.

(iv) T