JUDGMENT

Ajai Tyagi, J.

This appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 6.8.2018, passed by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-V, Banda, in Session Trail No. 204 of 2010 (State ofUttar Pradesh v. Km.Sandhya Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 119 of 2010 under Sections 364/34, 302/34, 201/34 IPC, Police Station-Baberu, District-Banda, whereby the appellants are convicted and sentenced for the offences under Section 364/34, 302/34 and 201/34 IPC for life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, further imprisonment for one month.

2. Heard Shri Vishwadeep Patel, learned counsel for the appellants, Shri Birendra Singh, learned counsel for the informant, Shri Patanjali Mishra, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

3. The brief facts of the case are that son of the informant, Namely, Kishan aged about 2-1/2 years went missing on 24.4.2010. Next day, on 25.4.2010 a missing report was lodged by informant at Police Station-Baberu, District-Banda. On 18.5.2010, the dead-body of the missing son was found in the well situated in the housing campus of accused-Prakashveer. In the meantime, on 1.5.2010, First Information Report (Ex.ka1) was lodged by informant with the averment that his son Kishan was playing in front of the gate of the house on 24.4.2010 at about 6:15 pm. and some unknown persons have kidnapped him.

4. After recovering the dead-body on 18.5.2010, another report (Ex.ka3) was given at Police Station-Baberu, District-Banda in which it is averred by informant that on 24.4.2010, his son Kishan went missing from the gate of accused-Prakashveer. On that date, he had gone to the pond with his mother. On coming back, he was following his mother and started playing near the gate of Prakashveer. At that time, Prakashveer, Sandhya (daughter of Prakashveer), Mukut, Gulab and Rakesh were present inside the house. At the same time, Shankar and Jaikaran @ Fakku were going towards the house of Shankar from the shop of Mattu. They saw that Kishan was playing inside the gate of the Prakashveer and all the aforesaid persons were standing inside the gate. He had belief that aforesaid persons have murdered his son and had thrown the body in the well with the help of Dinesh and Deshraj.

5. During the course of investigation, the Investigating Officer recorded the statement of witnesses under Section 161 Cr.P.C. Search-memo was prepared. On recovery of the dead-body, inquest proceedings were conducted and the body was sent for postmortem. Concerned doctor conducted the postmortem on the body of the deceased and prepared the postmortem report. After completion of investigation, the IO has submitted charge-sheet against the accused, namely, Kumari Sandhya, Prakashveer @ Malkhan, Gulab and Mukut under Section 364, 302 and 201 IPC.

6. The case, being triable exclusively by the Court of Session, was committed by Magistrate to the Court of Session. Learned trial-Court framed charges against the appellants under Sections 364, 302 IPC read with Section 34 IPC and Section 201 IPC. Accused-appellant denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

7. Prosecution examined following witnesses:

8. Apart from aforesaid witnesses, prosecution submitted following documentary evidence, which was proved by leading the evidence: