The prosecution failed to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt due to serious contradictions in witness testimonies and the unexplained delay in FIR registration.

1. Challenge in this appeal has been thrown to the judgment dated 22.12.2010 and order dated 28.12.2010, propounded by learned Sessions Judge, Kathua (file No. 24 / Sessions) in case titled 'State v. Darshan Lal', vide which, appellant came to be convicted for offence under S.302 of the Ranbir Penal Code , 1989, ("RPC") and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life and pay a fine of Rs.2 lacs., out of which 50% has been directed to be paid to the next of the kin of the deceased.

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

3. On 16.06.2005, Jaswant Singh, SHO Police Station Basohli, who had gone for the inquest proceedings in connection with death of Suresh Kumar and Madan Lal under suspicious circumstances, came back to the police station and 2 revealed that PW Bal Krishan, on being enquired had recorded his statement that on 14.03.2005, his son Madan Lal alias Madhi was present in the house in the morning. After sometime, one Suresh Kumar came to their house, had breakfast and both of them went towards Udhar Kati. Same day, dead body of Suresh Kumar with injuries on his face and parts of body was found from Nagali Hill, near gharat (water mill) of one Kunju Meg. Thereafter, on 16.03.2005, dead body of his son, Madan Lal alias Madhi was also seen in forest Kati near old kool (water pond), with injuries on head and parts of the body. The statement of Bal Krishan was reduced into writing by the SHO and the said statement along with docket was forwarded to the Police station through Shamsher Singh, SgCt / 408. It revealed during the inquest that appellant on the basis of old animosity and in furtherance of criminal intention to kill, inflicted blows of lathi on the head of deceased persons, killed both of them and threw their dead bodies down the hill. The appellant after the commission of crime fled from village Nagali. On the basis of this statement, FIR came to be registered and during investigation, the investigating agency besides other legal formalities got statements of material witnesses recorded under S.164 CrPC and laid charge - sheet against the appellant for the aforesaid offences.

4. The appellant was charged by the trial court for offence under S.302 RPC, whereby he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial, prompting the trial to ask for the prosecution evidence and prosecution has examined 23 witnesses to bring home guilt of the appellant.

5. Before we proceed to analyze the prosecution evidence, it shall be apt to give brief excerpts of the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, which are as follows: -

6. PW Shani, is the mother of deceased, Suresh Kumar.
She has stated that on the day of occurrence, her son at around 5.00/6.00 AM went to Udhar Dhoke along with cattles but did not return. At about 5.00 PM, she came to know that dead body of someone was lying on the foothill. She went to the spot and recognized the dead body of her son. The witness goes on to reveal that a couple of days prior to the occurrence, the accused had complained that his son was having illicit relation with his sister - in - law (bhabi) namely, Gudo, but her son reflected his ignorance about any such relationship. After three days, dead body of Madan Lal also came to be recovered from Kati forest. In cross - examination, she has stated that she was not present at the time of recovery of the dead body of Madan Lal, 2 kms away from the place of recovery of dead body of her son. Her son went alone to Udhar