The conviction under Section 302 IPC was overturned due to the prosecution's failure to provide reliable evidence, highlighting that witness testimonies were inconsistent and insufficient to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

(Delivered by Hon’ble Rajiv Gupta, J.)

1. The instant criminal appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 06.06.2019, passed by Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (Dacoity Affected Areas Act), Lalitpur in Sessions Trial No. 6 of 2018 ( State Vs. Sukh Lal Bunkar and another ), arising out of Case Crime No. 754 of 2017, under Section 302 /34 IPC, Police Station Baar, District Lalitpur whereby the trial court has convicted both the appellants under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and awarded the sentence of life imprisonment with default stipulation.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, as per the allegations made in the FIR, the incident is alleged to have taken place in the intervening night of 15/16.09.2017, while the first informant along with her husband Hari Kishan were sleeping at their doorstep in separate cots after taking their meals. It is further alleged in the FIR that at about 02:30 AM in the night, when she woke up, she found her husband lying dead with his neck slit. It is further alleged that some days prior to the said incident, there was an altercation between her husband and one Sukh Lal aged about 45 years and Pappu Bunkar aged about 35 years, both sons of Chandi Bunkar, who had threatened to kill him and consequent to the said threat, last night, while her husband was sleeping, his neck had been slit by some sharp object, causing his death. On the basis of the said written report of one Sangeeta, wife of Hari Kishan, an FIR was registered at Police Station Bar, District Lalitpur, under Section 302 IPC nominating both the appellants as accused.

3. On the basis of the written report handed over by the first informant Sangeeta, wife of Hari Kishan, Head Constable Tek Singh (P.W.-5) had drawn the chik FIR registered as Case Crime No. 754 of 2017, under Section 302 IPC, which has been proved and marked as Exhibit Ka-5 and thereafter, its corresponding G.D. entry was made, carbon copy whereof has been proved and marked as Exhibit Ka-6.

4. After registration of the FIR, the investigation of the said case was entrusted to P.W.-6 Rajendra Kishor Tripathi, who thereafter reached the place of incident and conducted an inquest on the person of the deceased, which has been proved and marked as Exhibit Ka-2. Thereafter, the Investigating Officer prepared other relevant documents, namely, photo-nash, challan- nash, letter to R.I., letter to C.M.O., proved and marked as Exhibit Ka-7 to Ka-10, and sealed the dead body after preparing its sample seal and handed over the same to the constable for taking it to the mortuary for post-mortem. An autopsy was conducted on the person of the deceased on 16.09.2017 by Medical Officer Dr.L.V. Gupta (P.W.-4), who has noted the following injuries on the person of the deceased :-

The ante-mortem injuries have been noted to be:

5. The Investigating Officer (P.W.-6) has further collected the plain earth and blood-stained earth from the place of the incident and also taken blood-stained Niwad from the cot and prepared its recovery memo, which has been proved and marked as Exhibit Ka-11.

6. Thereafter, on 17.09.2017, the investigation of the said case has been transferred to P.W.-7 Ram Sahai Singh, who reached the place of the incident and recorded the statement of the first informant Sangeeta and on 18.09.2017, recorded the statement of another witness Tudwa (P.W.-2), real brother of the deceased. Thereafter, on