Conviction based on circumstantial evidence requires continuity of links establishing guilt; 'last seen theory' must be supported by additional incriminating factors.

JUDGMENT :

KAUSHIK GOSWAMI, J.

1. Heard Mr. T J Mahanta, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. T Gogoi, learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 145/2024 and Mr. I H Saikia, learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 104/2024. Also heard Mr. R R Kaushik, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam for the State.

2. These two appeals are directed against the judgment of conviction dated 07.03.2024 and sentence dated 13.03.2024 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Baksa, Mushalpur in Sessions Case No.82/2022, whereby the accused appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 145/2024, namely, Md. Rafik Ali and co- accused/appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 104/2024, namely, Md. Jeharul Ali were convicted under Sections 302 /365/34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) each, in default of payment of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for further six months each under /34 of the IPC and also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years each with a fine of Rs. 2,000/- each and in default, simple imprisonment for another 3 months under Sections 365 /34 of the . Both these appeals are taken up together for disposal.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that PW-1 lodged an FIR alleging, inter-alia, that on 28.03.2020 at about 10:00 PM the accused/appellant, Md. Rafik Ali along with co-accused/appellant, Md. Jeherul Ali called her husband/deceased out of the house for having some talk and since then, her husband having not returned back, on the following day morning at about 9:00 AM, she called the accused/appellant, Md. Rafik Ali to enquire about the whereabouts of her husband. It is further alleged that the accused/appellant, Md. Rafik Ali replied that the co-accused/appellant, Md. Jeherul Ali knows about her husband and when she approached the co-accused/appellant, Jeherul Ali, he replied that it is the accused/appellant, Md. Rafik Ali who knows about her husband/deceased. Accordingly, she suspected that they had killed her husband in a pre-planned manner. Upon receipt of the said FIR, the Officer-in-Charge of the jurisdictional police station registered the FIR as Barama P.S. Case No. 31/2020 under Sections 120B/365/302/34 IPC . Accordingly, the investigating officer proceeded to investigate the matter by recording the statement of the informant and upon coming to learn that the body of the husband/deceased was found to be floating in a nearby pond, visited the place of occurrence, recorded the statements of the witnesses, recovered the dead body, performed inquest, prepared the sketch map of the place of occurrence as well as the residence of the deceased and sent the dead body for postmortem examination, collected the same and arrested the accused appellants and upon completion of the investigation, submitted the charge-sheet against the accused appellants under Sections 120B/365/302/34 of the .

4. Thereafter, the Chief Jurisdictional Magistrate committed the case to the jurisdictional Sessions Court and upon receipt of the records, Sessions Case No. 82/2022 was registered. The Trial Court thereafter framed charges under Sections 365 /302/34 of the IPC against the accused appellants and upon reading over and explaining the same to the accused appellants, they individually pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

5. During trial, the prosecution examined 13 witnesses, including the inform