The sufficiency of circumstantial evidence and the requirement for it to be complete and incapable of explanation on any other hypothesis than the guilt of the accused.

Heard the parties.

2. This appeal has been directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 23.02.2012 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, East Singhbhum, Jamshedpur, whereby and whereunder he has convicted the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced her to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.5000/-.

3. The case of the prosecution as unfolded in the fardbeyan of the informant is that the informant Sonaram Manjhi was informed by Sonaram Soren, who claims to be the brother of the appellant that the appellant has killed her daughter Putul aged about 11 years. On getting the information, the informant-Sonaram Manjhi went to the residential quarter of the appellant-accused at Swarnrekha colony and saw the dead body of Putul lying in that quarter. Froth was coming out from the mouth of the dead body and near the dead body torn pieces of pesticide packet was lying along with some pieces of bread. One spoon and a portion of the pesticide packet was found concealed by the accused-appellant in her sari. It appeared to the informant that the accused-appellant has poisoned her daughter to death. It is also mentioned in the fardbeyan that the deceased Putul was studying in class-IV in Sidhu Kanhu school and was staying in the hostel but she was brought forcibly to her residential quarters by the accused-appellant from the school hostel and the accused-appellant was telling different types of things after the death of Putul.

4. On the basis of the fardbeyan of the informant, police registered Mango (Olidih) P.S. Case No.264 of 2007 and took up investigation of the case. After completion of investigation, police submitted charge-sheet in the case. After commitment of the case to the Court of Session, the case was transferred to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-III, Jamshedpur and the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-III, Jamshedpur framed charge for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. Upon the accused pleading not guilty to the charges and claiming to be tried, she was put to trial.

5. In support of its case, the prosecution altogether examined eight witnesses. No evidence was adduced by the defence in this case. There is no eye-witness to the occurrence and the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence only.

6. P.W.3-Sonaram Manjhi, is the informant of the case. He has stated that he was informed by Sonaram Soren (P.W.4) over telephone, that the accused person, who used to live in Swarnrekha colony, is telling that she has killed her daughter. On getting the information from P.W.4, P.W.3 informed the police station. P.W.3 and the police reached the house of the appellant. P.W.4 was also there. On opening the door, they found that the dead body of Putul was lying there and froth was coming out from her mouth. A torn packet, a spoon was lying near the dead body which was seized by the police. When police apprehended the accused-appellant, she was found concealing pesticide packet in her sari. Police prepared the seizure list. P.W.3 identified his signature over the seizure list which was earlier marked as Ext. 1/1. He also identified the handwriting of the police officer who recorded his statement and his fardbeyan was marked as Ext. 3. P.W.3 was the secretary of Sidhu Kanhu School and the deceased was the boarder of the hostel of the school. Two days prior to the occurrence, the accused-appellant brought the deceased from the school for performing Puja. P.W.3 identified the accused-appellant who was present in the court. In his cross-examination P.W.3 has stated that he does not know the reason for murder of the deceased. He has further stated that he does not know what was written in the seizure list and he also does not know who were visiting the house of the accused-appellant.

7. P.W.4 – Sonaram Soren claims that the deceased was his niece. He has fu