JUDGMENT :

(Gajendra Kumar, J.)

1. This jail appeal has been filed by accused-appellant, Dileep through Superintendent of District Jail, Kannauj against impugned judgment and order dated 30.11.2016 passed by Smt. Preeti Srivastava, Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Kannauj in Session Trial No.363 of 2010, (State v. Dileep and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 1020 of 2008, Police Station Kannauj, District Kannauj, under Sections 302 IPC. By impugned judgment and order, accused-appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 302 IPC for life imprisonment along-with fine of Rs.5,000/-. In the event of default of payment of fine, he has to undergo further two years simple Imprisonment.

2. Prosecution story, in brief, is that on 21.07.2008, first informant-Kishori Lal submitted a written report Ex.Ka-2 to the Police Station, Kannauj, stating therein that on 21.07.2008 at about 10:00 AM, he was informed by the villagers that one dead body of an unknown person was lying in the field of one Shovran Lal son of Pitam Singh, resident of Haibatpur Katra, Police Station Kannauj, District Kannauj.

3. PW-8, Sub Inspector, Rajbahadur Singh Chauhan, on the said information held inquest over the dead body of unknown person after nominating punch witnesses and prepared inquest report, photo nash, challan nash and letter to C.M.O., fard report which are proved as Ex.Ka-6 Ex.Ka-7, Ex.Ka-8, Ex.Ka-9, Ex.Ka-10 respectively and other relevant papers thereto; sealed dead body and sent for postmortem, got prepared photographs of dead body. He also collected one towel, one shirt of deceased, one pants of light blue colour, one underwear, one set of plastic sleeper and prepared fard thereof.

4. PW-4, Dr. Nanhoomal, conducted postmortem over the dead body of unknown person aged about 25 years and found one ligature mark 32 x 4 cm around the neck as ante mortem injury. Doctor further opined that the cause of death was asphyxia as a result of strangulation on account of ante mortem ligature mark and three days prior to postmortem. He prepared postmortem report, proved and exhibited as Ex.Ka-4.

5. PW-9, Dayanand Singh, the then Inspector In-charge of Police Station Kannauj, District Kannauj, on 22.07.2008 under took investigation of case crime no.1020 of 2008, under Section 302 IPC and commenced investigation, recorded statement of witnesses, visited spot and prepared site plan Ex.Ka-11. On 28.07.2008 he tried to know about the deceased. He further recorded statement of PW-1 Smt. Munni Devi, PW-2 Smt. Suman; Rajesh, Smt. Sarojini and Babu Ram (not examined); arrested accused Mukesh @ Murari and Shera, recorded their statements and after completing entire formalities of investigation, submitted charge-sheet against Moolchand, Shera, Mukesh @ Murari and accused-appellant, Dileep. In his cross-examination he has stated that accused Moolchand had implicated accused Dileep to have been involved with him. No other accused had implicated accused Dileep.

6. On 05.08.2008, PW-1, Munni Devi submitted a written report Ex.Ka-1 in Police Station Kannauj stating that his son Sunder Lal was taken away by accused Mukesh @ Murari in the morning of 19.07.2008 from her house on the pretext of majdoori and since then he is missing. She came to know that a dead body of unknown person was found in the Village Haibatpur Katra and a prayer was made that she may be permitted to see the clothes of dead body, so as to know whereabouts of her son. She was shown photographs and clothes of deceased whereupon by which she recognized that dead body to be that of her son Sunder Lal. She further stated that Mukesh had taken away her son from the house and had murdered with his associates Shera, Moolchand and Dileep and in orde to remove the evidence they had thrown the dead body somewhere in Haibatpur, Katra. This was told by Moolchand to her married daughter Suman who informed her and this was told to the I.O. during the investigation. In her cross-examinatio