JUDGMENT

Per: Hon'ble Rajiv Sharma, J.

Since common questions of law and facts are involved in the above-titled criminal appeal, hence the same are being taken up together and adjudicated by this common judgment.

2. These appeals are instituted against the judgment and order dated 29.10.2015/03.11.2015, rendered by learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital, in Sessions Trial No.40 of 2014, whereby the appellants were charged with and tried for the offences under Section 302/201/34 IPC. The appellants were convicted and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (each) and in default of payment of fine to under additional rigorous imprisonment for a period of three months. The appellants were also convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of seven years under Section 201 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- (each) and in default of payment of fine to undergo additional simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

3. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that PW1 Nanhe Lal lodged a report on 19.01.2014, to the effect that his brother-in-law was living with his family in Bazri Company. He was working on contractual basis in Century Paper Mill. 2-3 days earlier the wife of Amar Pal informed him on telephone that Amar Pal had gone to market on 15.01.2014 but he did not come back. His dead body was recovered on 19.01.2014. He went to the spot, where the dead body was lying. The panchanama was prepared. He inquired the cause of death of his brother-in-law. He was told that the appellants have illicit relations with the wife of Amar Pal. He was told this fact by Amar Pal few days back. He met Dharampal and Ramveer and told him that on Wednesday, they have seen Amar Pal in the company of Rajkumar and Phool Chand. They have seen them crossing the bridge and then going towards the left side of the forest in the evening. According to him the appellants have killed his brother-in-law. The dead body was sent for postmortem examination. The investigation was carried out and the challan was put up after completing all the codal formalities. The prosecution has examined as many as ten witnesses in its support. The statements of the appellants were also recorded under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. They havedenied the case of the prosecution. The appellants were convicted and sentenced, as noticed hereinabove. Hence, these appeals.

4. Learned Advocates for the appellants have vehemently argued that the prosecution has failed to proveits case against the appellants beyond reasonable doubt. Learned State counsel has supported the judgment and order dated 29.10.2015 and 03.11.2015.

5. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the judgment and record verycarefully.

6. PW1 Nanhe Lal testified that 2-3 days earlier, he received a telephonic call from the wife of his brother-in-law. She told him that Amar Pal has gone to the market on15.01.2014. He did not come back. On 19.01.2014, the dead body of Amar Pal was recovered from the forest. She asked him to come to her house. He went to Lalkuan. He reached the spot where the dead body was lying. The police has prepared the panchnama. The police has collected the pieces of glass. These were put in the plastic bottle. The seizure memo was prepared in his presence. The contents of the same were read over to him. The blood soaked soil was also taken into possession. Thereafter, he visited the house of the deceased. The people were telling in hushhush tones that the appellants had developed illicit relations with the wife of Amar Pal. Then, he remembered that Amar Pal told him two months back when he came to his house that the appellants had developed illicit relations with his wife. Amar Pal told him that he advised the appellants not to ruin his family life. In his cross-examination, he has admitted that he did not know whether Gayatri has lodged any report before 19.01