JUDGMENT :

Shree Chandrashekhar, J.

Pappu Verma @ Pappu Kumar Verma and both his parents faced the trial on the charge of committing murder of Nitu Verma and causing disappearance of her dead body. In Sessions Trial No.18 of 2011, he was convicted and sentenced to RI for life and fine of Rs.5000/- under section 302 of the Indian Penal Code with a default stipulation to undergo further SI for six months. For the offence under section 201 of the Indian Penal Code, Pappu Verma has been awarded sentence of RI for two years.

2. Sadar PS Case No.607 of 2010 was registered on 28th August 2010 against Pappu Verma, his brothers and the parents. On 24th November 2010 a charge-sheet was laid against Pappu Verma for committing murder of his wife. The police submitted Final Form in respect of Raju Verma and Umesh Verma who are the brothers of Pappu Verma but the investigation in respect to Ram Lakhan Verma and Lila Devi, parents of Pappu Verma, continued for a longer time. Later on, the parents of Pappu Verma were also sent up for trial in a supplementary charge-sheet dated 7th April 2013 and they were tried separately in Sessions Trial No.265 of 2013.

3. Shiv Shankar Kumar Verma who gave his fardbeyan to Prahlad Sharma on 28th August 2010 at 13:00 hrs. at village Sirka Khirgaon made allegations of harassment and torture of his sister at the hands of the accused. The mother of Nitu Verma also made similar allegations and said that the accused would demand Rs.10,000/- or some time Rs.20,000/- in dowry. The informant expressed his apprehension before the investigating officer that his sister was strangulated to death by the accused and then put on fire in an attempt to cause disappearance of the evidence against them. In course of the investigation, neighbours of Pappu Verma gave statement to the investigating officer that the relation between Pappu Verma and his wife was not good and there were frequent fights between them. Some of the witnesses also said that on the day of occurrence they heard quarrel between Pappu Verma and his wife and that Nitu Verma had caught fire in her house.

4. Pappu Verma set up a defence that he was not at home when his wife died due to burn injury. In an attempt to show his innocence, he went further and took a position that his wife committed suicide by setting herself on fire, or may be that she caught fire when she was alone in the house. Dr. Subhash Prasad was one of the doctors who conducted postmortem examination, however, found otherwise and recorded a finding that Nitu Verma died asphaxial death and the burns found on her body were postmortem burns.

5. The defence of the accused was considered by the learned trial Judge in paragraph no.16 of the Sessions Court's judgment in the following manner:

“16. I have gone through the record and meticulously analyzed the evidence on the record. I find that the witnesses of the vicinity have turned hostile in this case, so the court will meticulously analyze the evidence adduced by the prosecution especially the evidence of Medical Officer and other witnesses to decide who is author of the crime. Admittedly, the deceased Nitu Verma was wife of this accused. She died at her matrimonial house and her dead body was found in her room. The medical officer has also found smell of kerosene oil and post-mortem burn injury on her body. The story advanced by the defence regarding suicidal death of the deceased is unbelievable only on this score that death was due to throttling which cannot be possible in a close room and a dead person cannot sprinkle kerosene oil on her body and put fire on her dead body. Absurdity of defence story begins with the plea that deceased committed suicide inside the room by pouring kerosene oil and set to fire herself. It speaks much in itself. In a criminal trial, the document can be fabricated, witnesses may be tutored but circumstantial evidence will prevail upon both. In this case, the deceased was subjected to throttling and after that miscreants t