ANANDA SEN, J.

This criminal appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 19th May, 2008 and order of sentence dated 22nd of May, 2008 by which the learned Additional Session Judge, Fast Track Court II, Daltonganj, Palamau has found the appellant Bablu Ansari @ Irsad Ansari @ Aslam Ansari guilty for committing offences punishable under Sections 302 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. After finding the appellant guilty of the aforesaid offences, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life along with a fine of Rs. 5000/- for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and 3 years' rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act. It has also been ordered that in the event of failure to pay the fine amount, the appellant shall undergo further imprisonment for a period of one year.

2. The prosecution case is based on the fardbayan of the informant, P.W.9 - Kalyug Mahto, the father of the deceased wherein he has stated that on 11.06.2005 at about 06.30 p.m., his son Ravi Kant Mehta @ Bablu aged about 18 years went out. Till 09.00 p.m. he did not return, so the informant searched for him, but he was not found thus the informant returned. The next day, i.e., on 12.06.2005, Kailash Ram, at about 06.00 a.m. in the morning came and told that some one has murdered Bablu and has thrown the body near the railway track. On hearing this, the informant rushed near the railway track where several persons were present from before. He saw the dead body of Bablu, which was lying between the up and down railway lines. The head of Bablu (the deceased) was towards the western side and the legs were towards the eastern side. There was a bullet injury on the chest of the deceased. The informant did not find any other mark of injury on the person of the deceased. He also stated that there was no blood stains on the spot where the dead body was found. He inferred that his son had been killed by some person some where and his body was brought and thrown between the railway lines.

3. On the basis of the aforesaid statement of the informant, the police registered Daltonganj G.R.P.S. Case No. 24 of 2005 under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The first information report was registered against unknown. Police investigated the matter and submitted chargesheet against this appellant and another accused person. Cognizance was taken and the case was committed to the Court of Session. This appellant claimed innocence and thus, was put on trial. Charges were framed for the offence under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 27 of the Arms Act. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

4. To prove the prosecution case, altogether 15 witnesses were examined by the prosecution, who were P.W.1 Sumitra Devi, P.W.2 Rameshwar Mahto, P.W.3 Pramod Kumar Mehta, P.W.4 Nagendra Singh, P.W.5 Kameshwar Kumar, P.W.6 Vidyapati Pal, P.W.7 Laxman Ojha @ Bijul, P.W.8 Sitaram Tiwary, P.W.9 Kalyug Mahto, P.W.10 Ashok Kumar Dubey, P.W.11 Pradeep Kumar Mehta, P.W.12 Dilip Pal, P.W.13 Dr. Vijay Kumar Singh, P.W.14 Tarun Kumar, P.W.15 Vijay Kumar.

Following are the documents, which were exhibited:—

Exhibit 1 - Signature of Pramod Kumar Mehta and Suryodhan Mehta on the seizure list.

Exhibit 2 - Signature of Jitendra Kumar Mehta, Pramod Kumar Mehta and Umesh Kumar Mehta on the production cum seizure list Exhibit 3 - Signature of Nagendra Singh in the statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C.

Exhibit 3/1 - Statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of Nagendra Singh.

Exhibit 3/2 - Certificate of P.W.14 in statement under Section 164 Cr.P.C. of Nagendra Singh

Exhibit 4 - Fardbeyan

Exhibit 4/1 - Endorsement on Fardbeyan

Exhibit 5 - Seizure List

Exhibit 6 - Production cum Seizure list

Exhibit 7 - Seizure list

Exhibit 8 - Postmortem Report

There were 5 material exhibits, which are as under:—

Material Exhibi