JUDGMENT :

[Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.]

1. The instant appeal is against the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 30.06.1994 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Seraikella in Sessions Trial No. 193/92, whereby and whereunder, the appellant has been convicted for the offence under Sections 302 and 201 of the Penal Code, 1860 and directed to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the commission of offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860 and further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 201 of the Penal Code, 1860 and both the sentences have been directed to run concurrently.

2. The prosecution story in brief as per the version of the informant is that his daughter, namely, Ahilya (deceased) was married in 1988 with accused Sahodar Mahato of village Laboda within Tamar Police Station of Ranchi District. It has been alleged that after one year of marriage, the accused and his brother, namely, Ghasu Mahato and their mother subjected Ahilya to cruelty by abusing and assaulting her. On 20-22 days prior to 01.08.1991, accused Sahodar brought Ahilya to the house of the informant where Ahilya complained about the aforesaid cruelty. On 25.07.1991, accused Sahodar again came to the house of the informant for the purpose of taking Ahilya back to his house. The informant sent Ahilya with accused Sahodar giving a lesson to accused that he will keep his wife in a proper way. On 30.07.1991, Sahodar again came to the house of the informant Haray Krishna Mahato, P.W.1 and asked whether Ahilya had come there. The informant was surprised. He replied that Ahilya had not come there. Accused Sahodar left the informant's house after saying that he is going in search of Ahilya and also suggested the informant to search Ahilya. On 31.07.1991 at 7 : 00 p.m., Gobind Mahato, son of informant's uncle saw a dead body in the field of Pancha Nand Munda and told about this to the informant. The informant along with Phoolchand Gope-P.W.4, Hargobind Mahato-P.W.6, Badri Nath Mahato-P.W.9, Ram Krishna Mahato and Jyoti Mahato reached at the field of Pancha Nand Singh Munda and saw the dead body which was decomposed. They could not identify the dead body in the night and kept two persons to watch the dead body. On the next morning, they identified that the dead body was of Ahilya (deceased). Thereafter, they sent Choukidar Sanatan Gope to the Police Station who brought the Police at the spot where the fardbeyan of the informant was recorded on 01.08.1991 at 14 hours. The informant has alleged that Ahilya was murdered by her in-laws and the dead body was concealed in the aforesaid field.

3. The F.I.R. was instituted on the basis of the aforesaid fardbeyan on 01.08.1991. The Police had conducted investigation and submitted charge-sheet against the accused persons including the appellant for the commission of offence under Section 302/34 of the Penal Code, 1860.

4. The case was committed to the Court of Sessions on 09.06.1992. On 05.11.1992, the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge has framed charge against the accused persons and thereafter, the trial commenced.

5. The prosecution altogether has examined 12 witnesses, basis upon which, the learned trial Court has come to the conclusion that the prosecution has been able to prove the charge against the appellant beyond all shadow of doubts for committing offence of causing murder of Ahilya, wife of the appellant and as such, found him guilty of commission of offence under Sections 302 and 201 of the Penal Code, 1860 and accordingly, sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life for the commission of offence under Section 302 of the Penal Code, 1860 and further, rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 201 of the Penal Code, 1860, which is the subject matter of the instant appeal.

6. Mr. P.S. Dayal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has taken the following grounds in assailing the impugned judgment of conviction:—

(i) The learned trial Cou