Mohammad Rafiq, J.

1. This appeal is directed against judgment dated 27.02.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Kotputli, District Jaipur, in Sessions Case No.21/2007 (24/2006), whereunder accused-appellant Naresh @ Tekchand @ Sumit, has been convicted for offence under Sections 364A, 302 and 201 IPC. For offence under Section 201 IPC, he has been sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/-; in default of payment of fine, to further undergo three months imprisonment. For offence under Section 364A IPC, he has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs.4000/-; in default whereof, to further undergo two months imprisonment. For offence under Section 302 IPC, he has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs.5000/-; in default whereof, to further undergo two months imprisonment. All the aforesaid substantive sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that a written report (Exhibit P-44) was submitted by one Hari Prasad Arora (PW-38) to Jhabbu Ram (PW-42), Station House Officer, Police Station Kotputli, at about 11.30 PM on 19.05.2005 stating therein that his son Deepak had left his shop on that day at about 10.00 AM without any information. His wife Smt. Shanti (PW-3) received a telephonic call on phone from an unknown person, who enquired from her about the informant (Hari Prasad Arora). She told that informant was not in house, the unknown person stated that he would again call later. Thereafter, another phone call was received at about 3.00 PM. This time, the caller told Smt. Shanti (PW-3) that if she wanted to save life of her son Deepak, the informant should deliver Rupees one lac at Jaipur Railway Station. Smt. Shanti (PW-3) asked him to give phone to Deepak, but he disconnected the phone. After two hours again phone call was received and the caller demanded the ransom. After receipt of aforesaid call, a written report was submitted to the police. The police on that basis, registered FIR No.309/2005 (Exhibit P 45) and investigation commenced. On completion of investigation, the police submitted negative final report.

3. Later on, the investigation was again started. Accused-appellant was arrested on 18.06.2006 vide memo Exhibit P-9 by Mohan Singh (PW-31), the investigating officer. The accused-appellant gave information on 27.06.2006 (Exhibit P-41) to the effect that on 19.05.2005 he caused murder of Deepak in a room of Ram Bhawan, Kotputli, and kept the dead body in a box and put lock on it and that he took the box to Jaipur in a bus, where he put the same in a train (Bareilly-Bhuj express) going to Bhuj (Gujarat). During investigation, site-plan (Exhibit P-1) was prepared and the box, which was seized in presence of Heeralal (PW-19) and Bhajanlal (PW-21), was identified by Ram Kumar (PW-2) in presence of Tehsildar Surendra Singh (PW-29) and memo (Exhibit P-2) in this respect was prepared. The police, after completion of investigation, submitted challan against accused-appellant for offences under Sections 302, 201 and 364A of the IPC in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotputli, District Jaipur, from where it was committed to the Court of Sessions and thereafter the case was transferred to the court of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track), Kotputli, District Jaipur, for trial. Learned trial court framed charges for offence under Sections 302, 201 and 364A of the IPC. Accused- appellant denied the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution, in support of its case, got 42 witnesses examined and exhibited documents from Exhibit P-1 to Exhibit P-48A. Learned trial court, vide judgment dated 27.02.2008, convicted and sentenced the accused appellant, as indicated above, by placing reliance on circumstantial circumstances. Aggrieved thereby, accused-appellant has filed this appeal.

4. Shri Rajesh Kala, learned counsel for accused-appellant, argued that learned trial court, whi