The burden of proof in circumstantial evidence cases lies with the prosecution to prove circumstances consistent only with the guilt of the accused, and failure to question the accused on all circumstances does not automatically vitiate the trial.

JUDGMENT

H.C. Mishra, J. - Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned counsel for the State.

2. The appellant is aggrieved by the impugned Judgement of conviction dated 27th February, 2002 and the Order of sentence dated 07th March, 2002, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track), Hazaribagh, in S.T. No. 463 of 1998, whereby, the appellant has been found guilty and convicted for the offences under Sections 302 and 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, and R.I for two years for the offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, and both the sentences were directed to run concurrently.

3. The appellant was in the police service, working as Librarian in Police Training College, Hazaribag, and was residing in the Government Quarter, allotted to him in the C.T.S Colony, Hazaribag, in which, the completely charred dead body of the wife of the appellant was found. Earlier, the U.D. Case No. 3 of 1998, was instituted on the basis of the statement of the present accused that his wife had committed suicide, but in view of the fact that upon the post-mortem examination of the dead body of the deceased conducted by the Medical Board constituted for the purpose, it was revealed that the deceased was first murdered and then her dead body was burnt, and all the burn injuries were found to be post-mortem in nature, the FIR was lodged on the basis of the written report of the informant Police Officer, who was investigating the U.D. case, submitted to the Officer In-charge of Sadar Police Station, Hazaribagh, on 17.1.1998. In the said written report, it is stated that on 17.1.1998, on the basis of telephonic information, this informant Police Officer along-with a constable had visited C.T.S. Colony at the Quarter of Ramesh Prasad Singh, who gave the statement that his wife, Usha Devi had committed suicide by putting herself to fire after closing the doors. On the basis of the said statement, the U.D. case was instituted and the charge of investigation was handed over to him. Upon looking into the dead body and on the secret information that she was burnt by her husband, he requested the Civil Surgeon for constituting the Medical Board for conducting the post-mortem examination of the dead body, which was conducted by a Board, consisting of three Doctors, which found that the deceased had been done to death by strangulation. As such, the cognizable offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code were made out against the accused. The copies of the inquest report and the post-mortem report of the dead body were also submitted, along-with the written report, on the basis of which, Hazaribagh Sadar P.S Case No.23 of 1998, corresponding to G.R Case No. 101 of 1998, was instituted for the offences under Sections 302 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, against the sole accused, and investigation was taken up. Upon investigation, the police submitted the charge-sheet in the case.

4. After commitment of the case to the Court of Session, charge was framed against the accused for the offences under Sections 302 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, twelve witnesses have been examined by the prosecution, including the I.O. and the Doctors, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased. No evidence was adduced by the defence.

5. Out of the material witnesses examined, P.W.-1 Ajit Kumar Sinha, P.W.-3 Devendra Kumar Sinha @ Umesh, the maternal cousin of the accused, P.W.-5 Arjun Prasad Singh, P.W.-7 Narendra Prasad Singh, who is the brother of the deceased, and P.W.-11 Suresh Prasad Singh, who is another brother of the deceased, had turned hostile and have not supported the prosecution case. P.W.-1 Ajit Kumar Sinha is also a witn