Pattanaik, J. - (1.) These three appeals arise out of one Sessions Trial being Sessions Trial No. 9-B/7 of 1990 and were heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Appellant Sanjiv Kumar stood charged under Sections 120-B, 302 and 201, I.P.C. Appellant Kamlesh Tyagi stood charged under Sections 120-B, 302 read with Section 120-B and 201, I.P.C. Appellant Lekh Raj Gupta stood charged under Sections 120-B, 302 read with Section 120-B and 212, I.P.C. It was alleged that all three of them hatched a criminal conspiracy to kill the deceased Rajesh Sharma and in furtherance of the said conspiracy accused Sanjiv Kumar caused murder of the deceased whereafter accused Sanjiv and accused Kamlesh caused disappearance of the evidence of the offence. Accused Lekh Raj is alleged to have harboured accused Sanjiv Kumar knowing him to have committed the offence with the intention of saving him from legal punishment. The learned Sessions Judge on a thorough analysis of the evidence on record convicted accused Sanjiv Kumar under Section 120-B, 302, I.P.C. and 201, I.P.C. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for the conviction under the first two charges and 7 years' R.I. for his conviction of the last charge. In addition, he was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- for each of the offences with the further direction that the sentences would run concurrently. Accused Kamlesh Tyagi was also convicted under Section 120-B, and Section 302 read with Section 120-B, I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life for each of the offences and pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- on each count. She was also further convicted under Section 201 and was sentenced to imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. Accused Lekh Raj was convicted only under Section 212, I.P.C. and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. Against their conviction the accused persons preferred two appeals - Criminal Appeal No. 121/93 and Criminal Appeal No. 125/93. The State also preferred two appeals against accused Sanjiv and accused Kamlesh and other against accused Lekh Raj for enhancement of sentence awarded by the learned Sessions Judge. These 4 appeals stood disposed of by the High Court by judgment dated 20th September, 1996, whereunder the conviction and sentence of accused Sanjiv Kumar under Sections 302/120-B and 201 was affirmed. Similarly the conviction and sentence passed against accused Kamlesh Tyagi was also affirmed. But, so far as accused Lekh Raj is concerned, though his conviction under Section 212, I.P.C. was upheld but the sentence was modified to the period already undergone. The appeals filed by the State for enhancement of sentence were also dismissed and hence the present appeals.
(2.) At the outset it may be stated that there is no eye-witness to the commission of murder and case accordingly hinges upon the circumstantial evidence. The prosecution case in nutshell is accused Sanjiv Kumar is nephew of accused Kamlesh being her brother's son. The father of the deceased was at relevant point of time posted as Additional District Attorney-cum-Public Prosecutor at Bilaspur. Accused Kamlesh had 4 daughters. The eldest daughter Chanchal, was a classmate of the deceased and the family of the accused and the family of the deceased were on visiting terms. Both the families were residing in the same colony in Bilaspur. Sometimes later the family of the deceased shifted themselves from agricultural colony to Dhora as PW-19 the father of the deceased got an official accommodation at Dhora. The further prosecution case is that deceased had developed some intimacy with Chanchal which was not approved of by the father of the deceased. PW 19 in fact met Kamlesh on one occasion and requested her to refrain her daughter from meeting the deceased. But Kamlesh told PW 19 that he should restrain his son from meeting Chanchal. It was also alleged that several threats were given by Kamlesh and Sanjiv to the deceased. On the fateful day on 25-5-90 a telephonic message was received from PW 1 that the son of the Additional District Attorney has been murdered by somebody with knife which information was entered in Daily Diary Report in the Police Station Sadar Bilaspur. The District Inspector of Police PW 36 transmitted the message on telephone to the In-charge City Police which was received by PW 35 who was directed to proceed to the spot. Said PW 35 then immediately proceeded and at the place of occurrence recorded the statement of Rajeev-PW 1 which was treated as an FIR. The police then started investigation and after completion of investigation filed the charge-sheet as already stated. The accused persons on being committed stood their trial and were ultimately convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, as already indicated. In the absence of any direct evidence relating to the murder of the deceased the learned Sessions Judge as well as the High Court based their conviction on the circumstantial evidence.
(3.) Learned Sessions Judge relied upon the following circumstances to bring home the charge against accused Sanjiv Kumar: (i) Sanjiv was seen going in the house of the deceased at about 10.15 a.m. PW 34 and he was seen coming out of the house of the deceased immediately after the occurrence by PW 1. (ii) Shortly after the occurrence Sanjiv Kumar went to the house of PW 2 Sapna when his clothes were bloodstained and he requested Sapna to get clothes for being changed from the house of the second accused Kamlesh. (iii) Conduct of accused Sanjiv Kumar in leaving the place and roaming under suspicious circumstances and on being enquired by PW 22 giving a false explanation. (iv) Recovery of knife Exhibit P 4 at his residence while in custody. (v) Recovery of clothes of the accused Sanjiv Kumar which he was wearing at the time of occurrence from the house of Kamlesh which on chemical examination were found to be stained with human blood. (vi) The medical evidence corroborating that the knife could be used for causing the injury on the deceased and the identification of Sanjiv Kumar by the prosecution witness. ;