JUDGMENT :

Anupinder Singh Grewal, J.

This appeal against acquittal is directed against the judgment of the Trial Court dated 21.05.2024, whereby the respondents have been acquitted in FIR No.102 dated 05.08.2019 under Sections 302, 201, 34 IPC, registered at Police Station Makhu.

SUBMISSIONS OF THE COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT

2. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the Trial Court has erred in acquitting respondents No.2 to 4 although there was clinching evidence warranting their conviction in the form of statement of the appellant/complainant, who was examined as PW-1 and is also the daughter of deceased-Sarwan Singh. She had categorically deposed with regard to the involvement of respondents No.2 to 4, who include her mother in the commission of the crime. Her statement was corroborated by PW-3 Harjinder Singh and PW-9 Gurdev Singh. Moreover, recovery of rope and motorcycle, which was used to throw the body of the deceased in the lake, had been effected from the accused in terms of their statements, which is strong evidence pointing towards their guilt. He also submitted that the chain of circumstances is complete and it points to the only conclusion i.e. towards the guilt of the accused. He has relied upon the judgements of the Supreme Court in the cases of Deonandan Mishra vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1955 SC 801, Mani Kumar Thapa vs. State of Sikkim, (2002) 7 SCC 157 and Ramjee Rai vs. State of Bihar (2006) 13 SCC 229.

3. Heard.

FACTUAL MATRIX

4. It is the case of the prosecution that the appellant had made a statement to the police to the effect that she has an elder married sister and two younger brothers. Her youngest brother-Arshdeep Singh was studying in class 8th in a Government School and after school, he used to work at the AC repair shop of Rajinder Singh @ Thind son of Santokh Singh (respondent No.3) and Sukhwinder Singh son of Bakshish Singh (respondent No.4), which was situated near Railway Crossing, Makhu. Both of them would drop her brother back home and would often visit their house and they had developed illicit relations with the accused-Baljit Kaur (respondent No.2), who is the mother of the complainant. The deceased had a sawmill at the house and was working as a carpenter, making doors and windows. Her mother Baljit Kaur used to often quarrel with her father. On the night intervening 28/29.07.2019 after having meals, while she and her brother were sleeping in one room and her parents were sleeping in another room, her mother had called Rajinder Singh @ Thind and Sukhwinder Singh to their house. On hearing some noise, she woke up and while sneaking through the curtains noticed that Rajinder Singh @ Thind and Sukhwinder Singh along with her mother Baljit Kaur were wrapping her father in the cover of a quilt and tying him with a rope and pulling it outside. She thereafter went back to sleep and in the morning enquired about her father from her mother, who told her that he had gone to Himachal. She later went to her uncle's house and narrated the entire incident to him and when they could not locate her father, they suspected that her mother in connivance with Rajinder Singh @ Thind and Sukhwinder Singh had murdered her father by strangulating him. She also stated that the motive was that her mother-Baljit Kaur and Rajinder Singh @ Thind had developed illicit relations which were opposed by her father and so Baljit Kaur in connivance with Rajinder Singh @ Thind and Sukhwinder Singh had murdered her father. The appellant who was examined as PW-1, in her deposition supported the prosecution version as stated in the complaint.

5. The prosecution also examined PW-3 Harjinder Singh, who is the brother of the deceased. He had stated that he was labourer by profession and on 29.07.2019, his niece came to him and disclosed that her mother-Baljit Kaur along with Rajinder Singh @ Thind and Sukhwinder Singh had strangulated her father, covered his dead body in the cover of a quilt and she had witnessed this. When h