Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the State.

2. The appellant is aggrieved by the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 27th May, 2009, passed by the learned 6th, Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad, in S.T. No. 351 of 2004, whereby, the sale appellant has been found guilty and convicted for the offences under Sections 302, 328, 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Upon hearing on the point of sentence, the appellant has been sentenced to undergo R.I. for life for the offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, R.I. for 10 years for the offence under Section 328 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I. for 2 years for the offence u/s 201 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of written report submitted by the Police Officer-Paras Nath Singh (P.W. 6), which shows that an U.D. Case was instituted on the basis of the fardbeyan of one Saraswati Bauri, the wife of the deceased Budhu Bauri, recorded on 21.5.1995, alleging therein that her husband Budhu Bauri was given a small bottle of english liquor by the accused Haru Bauri and Kalpana Bauri, from which her husband took some liquor and soon after that, froth started coming out from his mouth. He was taken to hospital, where he died. It is alleged that the remaining liquor of the bottle was thrown by the accused. On the basis of fardbeyan of the widow of the deceased, an U.D. Case No. 7 of 1995 was instituted and the dead body of the deceased was sent for post mortem examination. The viscera of the deceased was sent for forensic science examination, and in the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory, poison was detected and accordingly, on the basis of the written report of the Police Officer, Paras Nath Singh, the U.D. case was converted into Nirsa P.S. Case No. 106 of 2000 corresponding to G.R. No. 1922 of 2000, for the offences u/ss. 302, 201, 328/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and investigation was taken up. After investigation the police submitted the charge-sheet against the accused facing the trial.

4. Upon commitment of the case to the Court of Session, charge was framed against the sole accused for the offences under Sections 302, 328 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, and upon the accused's pleading not guilty and claiming to be tried, he was put to trial. In course - of trial, the prosecution has examined 8 witnesses in this case.

5. P.W. 5-Saraswati Bauri, is the wife of the deceased. This witness has stated that her husband died about 12 years ago, and on the date of occurrence they had gone to attend the Shradh of the aunt of the deceased in Village-Bhagabandh. On the next day, Haru Bauri and Kalpana Bauri gave some liquor from a bottle of english liquor to her husband and as soon as her husband consumed the same, froth started coming out from his mouth and he became restless. Her husband was taken to hospital where he died. The remaining liquor in the bottle was thrown by the accused Haru Bauri. She has stated that Haru Bauri was apprehended by the villagers, but by the time the police arrived, he managed to flee away. This witness has also stated that Haru Bauri was the grandson of the brother-in-law (sister's husband) of her husband. She has stated that the father of Haru Bauri had died who was working in a colliery, and her husband was likely to get a job at his place, due to which there was enmity between the parties for which the occurrence had taken place. She has identified the accused in the Court. In her cross-examination, she has stated that she had asked her husband not to take liquor, but he said that the grandson was offering the english liquor and he took some liquor. She has denied the suggestion of giving false evidence.

6. P.W.1-Bamapado Bauri, P.W.-2 Ram Chandra Bauri, P.W. 3-Akash Bauri and P.W. 4-Niran Bauri, are only the hearsay witnesses to the occurrence, stating that they were informed by the wife of the deceased