The prosecution must establish a motive for a crime, and witness statements must be consistent and credible to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

( 1 ) THE convict appellant (hereinafter referred to as me appellant for the sake of brevity) has preferred this appeal against the judgment and order dated February 15, 1992 and February 17, 1992.

( 2 ) BRIEF facts which led to the filing of the present appeal are as under : that one Charan Singh (Public Witness 3) resident of village Nanak Hen was sleeping in his house on July 22, 1989 at about 9. 001 9. 30 p. m. His brother known as Mir Singh (Public Witness 5) approached him and apprised him of the firing at his house by the appellant and in regard to the death of a girl known as Anjani. . On receipt of the said information he immediately rushed to the police station and informed the police. His statement was recorded vide D. D. No. 16a (vide Ex. Public Witness 2/a) by Public Witness 2 Mukhtiar Singh. The said DD entry was marked to SHO M. S. Yadav (Public Witness 18) for purpose of enquiry. Inspector Yadav alongwith SI Gita Ram (PW 17) and other police officers rushed to the place of occurrence. He met over there the mother of the deceased known as Smt. Ved Wati (Public Witness 7 ). He recorded her statement vide Ex. Public Witness 7{a and sent the same alongwith his endorsement (Ex. Public Witness 18 (A) through Constable Kuldip Kumar (Public Witness 14) for registration of a formal F. I. R. whereupon formal F. I. R. was recorded by HC Mukhtiar Singh (Public Witness 2) vide Ex. Public Witness 2/b.

( 3 ) SMT. Ved Wati (Public Witness 7) stated in her statement (Ex. Public Witness 7/a) that she was a resident of H. No. KG-364, LIG Flats, Vikas Puri. She has been residing at the abovesaid address alongwith her husband and children since the time of her marriage. She was married to one Mauji Ram (Public Witness 12) by her father and the brother, appellant herein. Her husband is a physically handicapped person. As such, her father and brother took away from him Rs. 24,0001- for giving her in marriage to him. The appellant had assured that he would return the said money later on. However, the same amount has so far not been returned. She approached her brother (appellant) many a times for the return of the said amount as she was financially weak. However, the appellant put her off on one pretext or the other.

( 4 ) ON July 22, 1989 she alongwith her daughter Anjani, aged about 13 years, and son Devi Singh who is 5 years of age, arrived at village Nanak Heri by bus as she also wanted to purchase ghee from the village. After having got down from the bus she first of all went to the house of her brother Suraj Bhan who was not available. She thereafter visited one or two places to fetch ghee, but the same was not available. Subsequently, she alongwith her children arrived at the house of the appellant in order to demand money from him,. She found the appellant sitting on a cot in the courtyard of his house alongwith his wafe and children. She also sat alongwith her children on a cot lying nearby. After a short- while thereafter she asked for the money. The appellant felt offended on her demand and tried to put off the matter. She there upon told her brother that he had very recently sold some land and as such he was now in a position to return the money, On , hearing me same the appellant got into his tanrum and abused her. He took out a rifle from the room and told her that he would return the money today. He further said that he would liquidate her entue family. Un having said so he bred a shot with the rifle at her. She immediately pounced upon the rifle as a result where of the bullet went upward and she escaped unhurt. While the said scuffle was going on M/r Singh also readied there and shouted as to what the appellant was doing? She lost control of the rifle. The appellant immediately tired another shot which hit her daughter i. e. , Anjani deceased, below the neck. The deceased bled prolusely. Sue collapsed on the cot itself. She and the above named Mir Singh tried to apprehend the appellant but could net.