The case established that circumstantial evidence, including last seen theory and motive, can convict defendants in a murder trial when linked coherently, substantiating the prosecution's claims beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT

PER: RAJESH SEKHRI-J INTRODUCTION:

01. This appeal has been directed against judgment dated 07.03.2018, passed by learned Principal Sessions Judge, Reasi [“the trial Court”], vide which, appellants came to be convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for offences under Sections 302 , 201 &120-B RPC .

02. Before a closer look at the grounds urged in the memo of appeal, it shall be expedient to have an overview of background facts of the case.

PROSECUTION CASE:

03. As the prosecution story would unfurl, on 16.03.2011, at around 4:15 p.m. one Ajay Prashar, owner of Prasher Guest House, Katra, lodged a written report in Police Station, Katra stating, inter alia, that on 14.03.2011, at around 9.50 a.m., two women checked in the Guest House. They were allotted Room No.110 and keys were handed over to them. One of the women made entry in Hindi by the name Shalu, Soumya Vihar, 128/260, Bhopal, M.P. Thereafter both of them went into the room of the hotel. At about 1:00 p.m. their room was found locked. He thought they had gone to Vaishno Devi and had not returned. However, when he peeped into the room through Ventilator, he found the dead body of one of the women lying on the bed, whose throat was slit with some sharp edged weapon. The woman who had made entry had run away. On the basis of this report, FIR No. 59 of 2011 for offences under Sections 302 RPC and 4/25 Arms Act came to be registered and investigation came into vogue.

04. The investigating officer, when looked into the room through ventilator, he found the dead body of a woman lying on the bed in a pool of blood. He broke open the lock of the room and found that throat of the deceased woman had a deep cut with some sharp edged weapon and blood had accumulated around. The place of occurrence was photographed, site plan was prepared and dead body was taken into custody. FSL team took finger prints from the spot. The investigating agency, besides other articles, seized entry register of the guest house, which was comprised of 188 pages and at page No. 118 of the Register, entry dated 14.03.2011, at 9:50 for Room No. 110 was marked as Mark Q-1. Autopsy on the dead body was conducted and after waiting for identification of the dead body for 72 hours, it was cremated as unidentified. The investigating agency also took CCTV footage of the Police Station, which revealed that on 14.03.2011 at 9:36 a.m., the deceased was found in the company of some unknown woman at bus stand. Photographs of the footage were developed and pamphlets were published with the address printed on the purse. Brother of the deceased, namely, Arvind Kumar got the information and contacted the police.

05. It surfaced during investigation of the case that deceased was married to appellant No. 1/accused, Arvind Verma some 10 to 12 years back, who used to ill treat the deceased. On 13.03.2011, he telephonically informed family of the deceased that she had gone missing. It came to the fore that husband of the deceased i.e., appellant No. 1 had illicit relations with some other woman and deceased was considered a hurdle. On this revelation, a police party headed by S.I. Romesh Choudhary was deputed for investigation in the State of U.P. Statements of material witnesses in the parental house of the deceased at Janakpur, U.P., in terms of Section 161 Cr.P.C. were recorded. Appellant No. 2 came to be arrested under Section 54 Cr.P.C. and was brought to the Police Station.

06. During interrogation, appellant No. 1/accused Arvind Verma, husband of the deceased, made a disclosure that he had extra-marital affair with appellant No.2 for last six to seven years. On 07.02.2011, they hired a room in