Pradeep Nandrajog, J.

.1. In a nutshell, case of the prosecution is, that having lost in his endeavour to win back his wife Rani Chaudhary, decree for divorce in whose favour attained finality when Petition For Special Leave to Appeal filed by the appellant before the Supreme Court was dismissed on 24.8.1982, the appellant made up his mind to murder Kishan Sikand, with whom Rani Chaudhary was residing and had decided to get married to. Being an ex-serviceman; having knowledge of ammunition, the appellant procured the raw ingredients to manufacture a bobby trap bomb, and using parts of a hand-grenade, managed to manufacture a bobby trap bomb, which was converted into a parcel, and on 25.9.1982, at around 7.30 – 7.45 PM, the appellant left the parcel containing the bomb at the staircase leading to the first floor of 98, Sunder Nagar, New Delhi, in the rear portion whereof the deceased Kishan Sikand was residing along with Rani Chaudhary. The bomb reached the deceased on 2.10.1982 and since the parcel containing the bomb was addressed to the deceased, he opened the same and while so doing, triggered of the contraption, resulting in an explosion. The sharpnells inside the bomb pierced the body of the deceased who died at the spot due to the resultant injuries.

2. The FIR was registered on the day of the incident itself on 2.10.1982. Rani Chaudhary was at Sanawar (H.P.) on the day of the incident and returned to Delhi the next day. Her statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was recorded on 3.10.1982. She informed the police therein about her turbulent marriage with the appellant and the divorce. She informed the police that the appellant had been extending threats to her to compel her to return to him and that had even been threatening Kishan Sikand. Apart from other persons whose statements were recorded during investigation, the statement of one Suresh Gopal, a close friend of the deceased and Rani Chaudhary was recorded on 5.10.1982. Needless to state, the appellant was a suspect from the very beginning but nothing incriminating against him could be gathered by the police in spite of the fact that the investigation was handed over to the Crime Branch of Delhi Police. On 19.3.1983 investigation of the case was entrusted to CBI.

3. On the day of the crime, after police received information thereof, from the room on the first floor of 98, Sunder Nagar where the deceased died a huge quantity of debris was lifted and as noted in the seizure memo Ex.PW-69/C was converted into 9 packets. It was noted in the seizure memo that torn and burnt pieces of paper were a part of the debris lifted. Three days later i.e. on 4.10.1982, some more material was lifted from the room and converted into 4 packets. Unfortunately, the seizure memo pertaining to the material lifted on 4.10.1982 was not made a part of the charge-sheet and could not be proved at the trial.

.4. The thirteen packets were sent to the Central Forensic Science Laboratory on 7.10.1982 for a forensic analysis, which as per Ex.PW-62/F commenced on 12.10.1982. Needless to state, the first and the foremost thing required was to segregate the debris and thereafter subject the constituents thereof to a forensic analysis as also to try and put together the burnt pieces of paper, as if a jigsaw is being solved, for the reason, the said pieces of paper may have contained a valuable information. It may be noted that according to Rani Chaudhary and Suresh Gopal they had seen the sender’s address on a slip of paper stuck to the parcel as also had seen the name and address of the recipient on a slip of paper stuck to the parcel.

.5. According to the prosecution, from the remnants i.e. the debris, on being segregated and reconstructed, Dr.G.R.Prasad (PW-62) could reconstruct two slips recording as under:-

.Slip 1 Slip 2 PA …………..OST Shiri Krishan …….. 98, Sunde……….agar From: Delhi Met……….e, 290, Hauz Qu….i Delhi ….0006

6. The typescript of the two slips, as per the prosecution, was go