JUDGMENT :

K.J. Thaker, J.

1. Heard Sri Ajay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Vikas Goswami, learned A.G.A. for the state.

2. Both these appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 17.11.2016 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No.1, Meerut, in Sessions Trial No.836 of 2015 (State vs. Ankit and another) arising out of Case Crime No.145 of 2015, Police Station – Parikshitgarh, District – Meerut.

3. Both the accused, who are father and son, have been convicted under Section 302 read with 34 of I.P. Code pursuant to registration of Case Crime No.145 of 2015. The learned trial Judge committed the case to the court of Sessions, being numbered as 836 of 2015. Both the accused Ankit and Harnam Singh were held guilty of commission of offence under Section 302 IPC read with section 34 and have been sentenced to the life imprisonment and Rs. 15,000/-fine and in default 6 months of imprisonment.

4. The genesis of the case started with an incident which happened on 23.4.2015 wherein the sister of the first informant, who was married on 19.2.2012 to Ankit Kumar S/o Harnam Singh and as her husband and father-in-law were harassing causing mental torture to the deceased, she committed suicide at about 3:30 p.m. on 23.4.2015. This was the first information given to the police authority.

5. It is mentioned in the F.I.R. that one Dhanraj S/o Amichand, who also resides in the vicinity of the accused, had conveyed that on the date of incident, the deceased had quarrelled with the appellant herein. On this information, a case under Section 306 of I.P. Code was registered. The investigation was put into motion by one Chandvir, who was the police officer. The investigating authority went to the site, made the site plan and recorded the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. but at the end of the investigation lodged an F.I.R. under Section 302 of I.P. Code.

6. The accused were summoned by the Magistrate and after completing the formality for committing the case to the court of Session, the matter was committed to the court of Session.

7. The accused Ankit was in custody on being summoned by the court of Session, were presented before learned Sessions Court. Both the accused pleaded not guilty and they wanted to be tried.

8. The police after recording the statements of several witnesses filed charge-sheet against both the accused persons. Being summoned the accused were committed to the court of Sessions as the offences for which the accused were charged were exclusively triable by the court of Sessions. It is not the case of prosecution that death is a murder.

9. The charges were framed for commission of the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. read with Section 34 against both the accused persons, which was denied by them. They pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

10. The trial started and the prosecution examined a total of 10 witnesses, who are as follows:

11. In support of the oral evidence following documents were filed:

12. The prosecution examined several witnesses in support of the prosecution case so as to bring home the charge with which both the accused were charged. The evidence of PW1-Pramod Kumar in his oral testimony accepted the fact that his sister – deceased was married on 19.2.2012 with the accused Ankit and his elder sister was married with Mohit (elder brother) and