JUDGEMENT

This criminal appeal has been filed preferred by the appellants being --2-- aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.05.2013 passed by passed by Third Additional Sessions Judge, Mandsaur in Session Trial No.199/2012 whereby the trial court has convicted the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment with fine of Rs.1000/- and under Section 397 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 7 years with fine of Rs.1000/-, with default stipulation.

2. According to prosecution story, Ramsingh was residing with his wife Shobhabai, two daughters and two sons at Billod Darwaja, Nahargarh, District-Mandsaur. On 19.07.2012, he went to field with Balu and his wife Shobha was at home. His son went to school in morning. His wife Shobhabai regularly went to field taking her cattle. At 12 p.m. son-Rahul came to Ramsingh at field and stated that he went to meet his mother but mother was not seen. Then after, they went in search of her and found her injured. Her both feet were amputated and anklets were also found missing. Ramsingh went to police station and lodged report. Report was lodged under Section 302 and 394 of IPC against unknown persons.

3. Police came on the spot and prepared Laash Naksha Panchayatnama and spot map. The dead body was sent to hospital for postmortem. During investigation, police took statements of Madanlal and Ramkuwar in which appellants' going on the spot came into light and the appellants were arrested and on his memorandum drawn under Section 27 of Evidence Act, silver anklets and clothes of appellant/Ghanshyam were seized from Ghanshyam and one sickle and cloth of Zakir were also seized. Ornaments were put to identification and Ramsingh identified the same to be of his wife. Blood samples of appellants were taken for DNA and sent to FSL, Sagar along with weapon, cloth and other case properties along with draft Ex.P/20. Report was received as Ex.P/23. After further usual investigation police filed charge-

sheet against the appellants before the magistrate court.

--3-- 4. After committal, the case was committed to the trial court and trial court framed charges against the appellants and the appellants abjured their guilt and sought trial 5. In turn, the prosecution in order to prove its case examined nine witnesses. After completion of prosecution evidence, appellants were examined under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. Appellants took defence that they have not committed offence and they have been falsely implicated in the offence.

6. After hearing the learned counsel for both the parties, trial court found the appellants guilty of the charge and convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

7. Being aggrieved by the impugned judgment, appellants have filed this appeal on the ground that that trial court has committed grave error in not considering that the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and it is settled law that without establishment of chain of circumstances, appellants cannot be convicted. In the present case, chain of circumstances has not been established by the prosecution evidence. It has been further stated that trial court has misread and mis-appreciated the statements on record and thereby come to a wrong conclusion unwarranted by the law. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that trial court has committed error in discarding defence version and in relying upon the prosecution version which is full of contradiction and omissions and no such reliance upon the same can be placed in convicting the appellants.

8. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that looking to the fact that the doctor who took blood samples of appellants vide Ex.P-18 and Ex.P-19 has not been examined and the sample, weapon, clothes and other case properties remained intact till reaches to FSL from the date of its seizure and not tampered with, is also not proved. Link eviden