The prosecution must establish a complete chain of circumstances pointing towards the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt in cases based on circumstantial evidence.

JUDGMENT :

SUNITA AGARWAL, J.

1. Heard Sri Dharmendra Dhar Dubey and Sri Radheshyam Yadav learned counsels for appellant-Ram Prakash, Sri Nipun Singh learned counsel for appellant Chhatrapal and Amicus Curiae for appellant Kunta Devi and Sri Rupak Chaubey learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

2. These three connected appeals have been preferred against the judgment and order dated 5.9.2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 2, Rampur in Sessions Trial No. 75 of 2005 (State vs. Smt. Kunta Devi and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 317 of 2004, under Sections 364, 302/34 and 201 IPC, Police Station Bilaspur, District Rampur, convicting three appellants herein namely Smt. Kunta Devi, Ram Prakash and Chhatrapal for the offences under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and sentencing for life imprisonment with fine of Rs. 10,000/-each; the default punishment is one year rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 364 IPC, two appellants namely Smt. Kunta Devi and Ram Prakash have been convicted and sentenced for ten years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 5000/-each; the default punishment is six months rigorous imprisonment. Under Section 201 IPC, appellants Kunta Devi, Ram Prakash and Chhatrapal have been convicted and sentenced for five years rigorous imprisonment with fine of Rs. 2000/-each; the default punishment is three months rigorous imprisonment. All the punishments are to run concurrently.

3. It may be noted, at the outset, that the trial had been conducted against four accused persons including three appellants herein and one Devi Das son of Baldev Prasad, had been acquitted by the trial court by giving benefit of doubt.

4. As per the prosecution case, a first information report was lodged on 14.5.2004 at about 12:15 hours by one Dharampal son of Bhupal resident of village Vakainiya Bhat, Police Station Milak, District Rampur. As per the statement in the said report, the first informant is the brother of the deceased Ratan Lal, appellant Smt. Kunta Devi is the wife of the deceased whereas appellant Ram Prakash is son-in-law of deceased Ratan Lal. Appellant Chhatrapal has been mentioned therein to be an acquaintance/friend of appellant Ram Prakash. As per the averments in the written report filed by the informant Dharampal, his deceased brother Ratan Lal was residing in the village along with his wife Kunta Devi, children and his son-in-law Ram Prakash. It was stated by the informant therein that the wife of his deceased brother namely Smt. Kunta Devi was having illicit relationship with her son-in-law appellant Ram Prakash and having got the knowledge of the said fact, his brother (deceased) remained annoyed with them. On 11.5.2004, the deceased went out of the house along with his wife and son-in-law and did not return home in the evening though his wife and son-in-law had returned back. Next day also, when the deceased did not return, they went to make searches with their relatives. During the inquiry, Nemchand son of Dori Lal and Babu Ram son of Madan Lal told the informant that they had seen Kunta Devi, deceased Ratan Lal, Chhatrapal and Ram Prakash while they were standing together near Kameree Tiraha in Bilaspur. Being suspicious, on 14.5.2004, when he along with other villagers named in the report, made inquiry from appellants Kunta Devi and Ram Prakash, they confessed that they had illicit relationship and conspired to remove the deceased from their way. On 11.5.2004, they took the deceased along with co-accused Chhatrapal and a relative Devidas to Milak and made him consume liquor, they then brought the deceased to Bilaspur via bus and in the Jungle of Pipaliya Mahto, they had killed the deceased. The confession of appellant Kunta Devi has been narrated in the written report that her son-in-law caught hold of the legs of the deceased and she and Devidas caught hold of both hands when Chhatrapal strangulated the deceased. It is then narrated in the written report that on the said conf