PRITINKER DIWAKER, J.

1. This appeal arises out of the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 3.2.2012 passed by the Sessions Judge, Janjgir - Champa in ST No.57/2011, convicting the appellant under Section 302 of IPC on two counts and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.5000/- on each count with default stipulation.

2. In the present case, there are two deceased namely Hanuman Prasad Sahu and Amidas. Previously wife of the appellant namely Nohar Devi was Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat-Darri and she was succeeded by Anita Sahu, wife of deceased Hanuman Prasad. It is said that fishing rights of the village pond were given to a society, of which the appellant was the President. Further case of the prosecution is that wife of deceased Hanuman Prasad used to demand the agreed amount from the appellant, over which the appellant got annoyed and on 24.1.2011 called Hanuman Prasad, who was the village doctor, in his house for his treatment. Hanuman Prasad came to the house of the appellant and he also called PW-6 Amarnath to have liquor in the house of the appellant. Further case of the prosecution is that deceased Hanuman gave Rs.50/- to the appellant for bringing liquor, which was brought by the appellant and then all the three i.e. Hanuman Prasad, appellant Karamchand and PW-6 Amarnath consumed the liquor. While going the appellant gave another bottle of liquor, white in colour, to PW-6 Amarnath for consuming the same with Hanuman and when he refused to accept the same saying that he has already consumed enough, the appellant gave said bottle to deceased Hanuman and then he (PW-6) along with Hanuman went towards Basti. It is further case of the prosecution that while Hanuman Prasad and PW-6 Amarnath were returning they met other deceased Amidas and all the three sat in the house of PW-6 Amarnath for consuming liquor. In two separate glasses said liquor was poured whereas the some liquor was left in a bottle to be consumed by PW-6. Hanuman Prasad and Amidas both consumed the said liquor and complained about its taste to PW-6. When PW-6 tasted the liquor he too found its taste something different and immediately spat the same. All these three persons became unconscious thereafter and were taken to hospital by their relatives with the help of other villagers. In the hospital, Hanuman Prasad and Amidas were declared brought dead whereas PW-6 remained hospitalized for some days and his MLC is Ex.P/30 conducted by PW-20 Dr. Ramayan Singh.

After the death of both the deceased persons, unnumbered merg Ex.P/23 & 24 were recorded on 25.1.2011 whereas numbered merg Ex.P/18 & P/19 were recorded on 27.1.2011. Inquests over the dead bodies were conduced vide Ex.P/2 & P/4 on 25.1.2011. Postmortem on the dead bodies were performed on the same day vide Ex.P/28 & P/29 by PW-18 Dr. RD Gupta. According to the autopsy surgeon, nails of deceased Hanuman Prasad had turned bluish, face was cyanosed; his pupils were dilated; brain membrane, brain tissue, membranes of ribs, lungs, trachea, membrane of the heart and spleen were congested, mucus membrane was reddish. The cause of death of Hanuman Prasad was asphyxia because of poisoning. However, the doctor advised for chemical examination of the viscera. Likewise, the doctor noticed that nails of deceased Amidas had turned bluish, there were abrasions on both the forearms, conjunctiva was congested; brain membrane, intestine membrane, lungs, liver, spleen were congested, mucus membrane was reddish. In his opinion, the cause of death was asphyxia due to poisoning and he advised for chemical analysis of the viscera. As per FSL report (Ex.P/34 & 35) in the viscera of both deceased Amidas and Hanuman Prasad, poisonous substance namely organophosphorus pesticide chlorpyrifos was found.

3. On the memorandum of the appellant Ex.P/9 recorded on 5.2.2011, seizure of one plastic box, two plastic bottles containing pesticide were seized vide Ex.P/10. As per FSL report E