Dinesh Chandra Somani, J.

This criminal appeal has been preferred under Section 374 of CrPC against the judgment of conviction dated 22.04.2008 and order of sentence dated 23.04.2008 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Sessions Case No. 62/2006, whereby the appellant has been convicted under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo three months' rigorous imprisonment.

2. Prosecution story in brief is that on 05.03.2006 at 10.30 PM, the complainant-Mukesh(PW-1) submitted a written report (Ex.P-1) to SHO, Police Station, Jhotwara, Jaipur stating therein that marriage of his sister Smt. Pinky Devi was solemnized with Om Prakash son of Bheruji Sain resident of Khora Bawdi before 10-12 years. His brother-in-law Om Prakash was having doubt on his sister due to which he used to harrass her. Today, he was out of station and he got information that for this reason, his brother-in-law Om Prakash quarrelled and committed her murder. He gave his House No. 27-B, Green Park, Dadi Ka Phatak to his sister for her residence, because her husband and in-laws used to harrass her. He has doubts that Om Prakash knowingly murdered his sister. Upon this report, endorsement was made on direction of Virendra Kumar (PW-22) SHO, Police Station, Jhotwara, Jaipur and FIR No. 183/2006 (Ex.P-2) was registered for commission of offence under Section 302 of IPC.

3. During the course of investigation, Panchayatnama was prepared and autopsy of the corpse of the deceased Pinky Devi was performed by Dr. N.L. Disania (PW-23). Statements of Mukesh and other witnesses were recorded under Section 161 of CrPC. Site plan was prepared. Clothes worn by Pinky Devi (the deceased) at the time of incident were seized. Accused-appellant Om Prakash was arrested. On information given by the accused-appellant under Section 27 of the Evidence Act, hair of the deceased's head, hair clip and pieces of bangles of the deceased were recovered from the place of occurrence and stola (chunni) used in commission of the offence was also seized. Photography of place of occurrence got conducted. Hair, clothes and viscera of the deceased were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical examination and after usual investigation, offence under Section 302 of IPC found prima-facie proved against the accused-appellant Om Prakash, therefore, charge-sheet was filed against him in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3, Jaipur City, Jaipur, who committed the case to Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur and thereafter, the case was transferred to the Court of Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur City, Jaipur.

4. In order to prove the case, the prosecution examined 24 witnesses and marked 41 documents.

5. Thereafter, learned trial court put oral evidence of the prosecution witnesses and documentary evidence produced by the prosecution to the appellant under Section 313 of CrPC. In reply to the prosecution evidence, the accused-appellant admitted that Pinky (the deceased) was his wife and sister of Mukesh (PW-1) and his dead body was handed over to her brother-Mukesh. He also admitted the fact that he brought the auto-rickshaw of Subhash (PW-8) and took his wife Pinky in his Auto-rickshaw. Accused-appellant admitted the statement of (PW-8) Subhash and (PW-20) Mukesh Photographer, to be true. He also admitted that he was arrested. The appellant denied the fact of recovery of hair, clip and pieces of bangles and stola (chunni) from his house. He also stated that he gave no information under Section 27 of Evidence Act. He further stated that police himself put bangles on the bed and thereafter, asked him to pick the same and give to them. He does not know the cause of death of his wife-Pinky and he does not know whether injuries were there on the body of the deceased. He does not remember, if he brought Dr. Prabhu Dayal to h