R.N. Ray, J. - (1.) The appellant Avdesh Singh preferred this appeal against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by Surya Prasad, learned Sessions 'Judge, at Manipuri in Session Trial No. 368 of 1984, under Section 302/201 IPC dated 31.8,1985. That Sessions Trial arose out of Crime No. 112 of 1984, P.S. Khergarh district Mainpuri. The prosecution case runs as follows: Usha Devi, daughter of informant, was legally married to the accused-appellant Avdesh Singh. The said Avdesh Singh was in army at the time of the marriage and was so till the date of occurrence. It is alleged that the accused had cone to the house of complainant Tilak Singh from his service two days prior to the occurrence and remained in the house till the time of occurrence. It is further alleged that the relations between the accused and his wife Usha Devi (deceased) were not good prior to the incident as the accused-appellant intended to solemnize second marriage with another women at any cost. The letters Exs. Ka-2 and Ka 3 reveals such desire of the accused-appellant. It is the further case of the prosecution that on 14.8.1984, he alongwith his wife Smt. Usha Devi were lying on a cot in the courtyard of the house of the informant. There was none else there. The informant Tilak Singh, father of the deceased Usha Devi was sleeping at the door outside the house while his two sons Madho Singh and Tejvir Singh and his son's Sala Updesh were sleeping on the roof of the house. The witness Suresh was sleeping outside the informant's house. It transpires in the evidence of the said Updesh Singh. brother-in-law of the informant's son, that he used to reside in that house. It is further alleged that at about 4 a.m. on 14.8.1984 the informant Tilak Singh heard the shrieks of his daughter Usha Devi and woke up hearing the shrieks and went to rush down to the courtyard but he found that the door was bolted from inside. He asked the accused to open the door, but the accused did not pay any heed to his request, It is further alleged that the informant Tilak Singh then called his son Madho Singh who came down from the roof and opened the door. Then the informant and others entered the house, the informant found the accused standing near the body of the deceased, which was found to be in slight burning condition. The accused tried to run away but he was caught hold of by the informant's sons and other witnesses. The informant found his daughter already dead. The informant Tilak Singh got a report Ex. Ka-l written by Ramesh Chandra. Village-Pradhan, on his dictation relating to the occurrence. The informant was having some trouble in his leg, was not in a position to move fast. On his request Ramesh Chandra took him to the Police Station by his Motor Cycle. On reaching there, the informant Tilak Singh handed over that report to the Head Moharrir at the Police Station. On the basis of the same he prepared a chik report (Ex-Ka 8) and registered a case in the General Diary at Serial No. 8, The extract of serial No. 8 has been marked as Ex. Ka. 9. After the registration of the case, the investigation was entrusted to Sri Om Prakash Singh, the then S.O. of the P.S. Khergarh for investigation. He visited the place of occurrence and prepared the inquest report Ex. Ka-10 and other documents such as Ex. Ka 11 to Ka 11 and also took into custody the material exhibits vide Ex. 1 to 12 and prepared seizure memos for the same according to usual practice. He arranged for sending the dead body of Smt. Usha Devi to mortuary for post mortem under police escort in sealed bag. Dr. M.S. Upadhaya, the then Orthopaedic Suregiop, I.N.M Hospital Firozabad, District Agra conducted the post mortem examination on the dead body of Smt. Usha Devi and found the following ante mortem injuries:- l. Legature mark over front and sides of neck in upper part (5 cm. length x 1 cm. width) horizontal in direction, Base of the grove is contused (Ante-mortem Injury). 2. Extensive burn grade I and II present all over body. Piece of burnt Dhoti and petticot recovered having kerosene oil smell over body. Sign of hair and blackening of skin present. No line of redress seen over skin. False vesication is present. Base of blusters is yellowish in colour. (Burn is post mortem injury). The doctor prepared the post mortem report. which is marked as Ex. Ka. 7. According to the doctor the death took place at about 4 a.m. on 14.8.1984 due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation. After the completion of the investigation and the receipt of the post mortem report, the Investigating Officer submitted a charge sheet, Ex. Ka-23. against the accused person. Then the charges were framed by the learned Sessions Court on considering the material before him. The charges were read over and explained to the accused, who pleaded not guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried. The prosecution examined seven witnesses in all, and relied upon certain documentary evidence i.e. Ex. Ka 2 to Ka 6 and certain other materials i.e. Ex. 1 to 12. In support of the prosecution case PW 1, Tilak Singh, had deposed that the accused, Avdesh Singh, had come to his house from his service two days prior to the date of occurrence and remained there for two days. Tilak Singh's daughter, Smt. Usha Devi was also at his house. His sons Madho Singh, Tejvir Singh and Updesh Singh, Sala of his son, were also present at the house at the time of occurrence, His sons and Updesh Singh were sleeping at the roof of his house. He was sleeping outside the door and Avdesh Singh and Smt. Usha Devi were sleeping on a cot in the Angan. Learned Advocate for the appellant submitted that it is very unusual to believe that in a village the husband and wife would sleep on a cot in the Angan which naturally is exposed to other members residing in that house. It has been submitted that Ex. Ka 2 and Ext. Ka 3 and the two letters should not be taken into consideration to ascertain the motive because these letters were written about three years ago since the date of occurrence and these letters were not relevant within the meaning of Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act because these letters were not written immediately before or after the occurrence of murder of Smt. Usha Devi. It is revealed in the evidence that the accused appellant used to stay in his father-in-law house and used to spend some days with his wife and then he used to take his wife to his house. If any bad relation might have cropped up for some reason or the other, it should be deemed to be over by the lapse of time coupled with the fact that subsequent letters which are Ext. Ka-3 and 5 did not disclose any bad relation between the accused and his wife Sint. Usha Devi. It has been argued that P.W. 1. Tilak Singh, heard the shrieks of his daughter and then wanted to go to Angan but he was prevented from going there immediately, as the door was closed from inside. He then called his son Madho Singh to open the door, who came down through the stair case and opened the door. Then P.W. alongwith his sons and Updesh entered the house and found that Snit. Usha Devi had already died and her body was lying in a slightly burning condition. It has been submitted that taking maximum latilude in favour of the prosecution, it was expected that PW 1 had reached near the Angan and found the dead body of his daughter in slightly burning condition within three or four minutes from hearing the sound of shrieks made by Sint. Usha Devi. Obviously, it was not possible for the accused to murder his wife and put the dead body on fire within such a short span of time. Apart from that, learned Advocate further submitted that it was natural that PWI, Tilak Singh, alongwith his sons and Updesh would have started assaulting the accused, who was actually found standing near the dead body of Sint. Usha Devi in the manner and in the fashion as stated by PW 1 but instead of that it transpired in evidence that the accused appellant asked for the dead body so that he could take the dead body to his village for cremation in accordance with rites. This aspect should be taken for consideration to hold that the prosecution story is baseless and concocted one. It has been further submitted that there was no independent witness relaing to the alleged occurrence. There is no direct evidence relating to the murder of Smt. Usha Devi and the prosecution relied upon the circumstantial evidence to prove the prosecution case. It has been further submitted that the prosecution could not establish complete chain which could point out to the guilt of the accused. It has been submitted that PWI and PW 2 admitted that the relations between the appellant and his wife. i.e. deceased Sint. Usha Devi were good. It has further been submitted that in view of the said material the appeal should be allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence be set aside. The learned A.G.A. supported the judgment on the same reasons as given by the learned trial court and further submitted that besides the accused none else was present in the Angan at the relevant point of time. P.W. 1 woke up on hearing the shrieks of his daughter and rushed wherefrom the shrieks came. But he was precluded from moving towards the direction as the door was bolted from inside. Then PW I called his son, who woke up, came through the stair case, opened the door and then only PW I and others went to the place where Smt. Usha Devi was lying in slightly burning condition and the accused was standing near the dead body. The accused tried to run away on seeing P. W.1 and others. The accused was apprehended and caught hold of by the sons of P. P.W. I . This conduct on the part of the accused also strengthened the prosecution story that it was the accused who murdered his wife Usha Devi. It is submitted that the appeal be dismissed. We have considered the submissions of both the sides and perused the record minutely and went through the evidence carefully. It is true that Ext Ka-2 and Ka-3 were written about three years before the alleged date of occurrence, but from these two letters we can assess the mind of the accused appellant who was determined to marry for the second time and to finish his wife Usha Devi to achieve his goal. The fact that few days prior the date of occurrence accused visited PW 1's house and stayed with his wife for some days per-se does not reflect that the mind of the accused was changed. During these period Sint. Usha Devi was young and healthy one. So apart from any other factor under the impulse of sex, the accused appellant might have visited the house and resided with Smt. Usha Devi. It is true that nobody has seen the accused appellant to cause death of Smt. Usha Devi by strangulation but it appears from the evidence that except the accused appellant none was present on the alleged time of occurrence in the Angan where the accused appellant was lying with his wife Usha Devi on a cot. PW 1 was sleeping outside the house near the door and his both the sons and Updesh were sleeping on the roof. So there was no occasion for anybody to be near the deceased at the time of alleged occurrence. His evidence was corroborated by the evidence of the doctor who performed the post mortem examination as he found ante mortem injuries on the neck of the deceased and found the same to be fractured and deposed that the death took place due to asphyxia, which was due to the strangulation which took place at about 4 a.m. on 14.8.1984. P.W.1's evidence gets corroboration from evidences of his sons. The injuries were ante mortem injuries as per evidence of the doctor who conducted the post mortem on the dead body of the deceased Smt. Usha Devi. The only door for entrance exit was bolted from inside -and when P.W.1 wanted to go he was precluded as the door was bolted from inside. P.W. stated on oath that he called Avdesh to open the door but he did not pay any heed to the request. Then he asked his son to open the door, who came down through the stair case from the roof and opened the door and then only P. W. I. Tilak Singh, alongwith his sons could reach near the place and found that the dead ' body of Smt. Usha Devi was lying slightly in burning condition and the accused appellant was standing beside her. It is not the case of anybody nor there was any evidence of worth that there was anyone else who entered the house and came to that Angan. Exhibits Ka-2 and Ka-3 give the picture of the determined mind of the accused. The accused appellant wanted to get his wife off from his way so that he could marry with another women. Though these letters were of 1981 but nevertheless these letters speak volume regarding the motive of the accused for intentionally causing the death of Smt. Usha Devi by strangulation. The circumstantial evidence was so compact and credible and they are so chained in the fashion that taking all the evidences together, if it is duly considered, the only possible pragmatic inference comes out which points out to the guilt of the accused unhesitatingly. The conduct of the accused appellant relating to his attempt to run away from the place of occurrence immediately when he was found standing near the dead body of the deceased Usha Devi by PW-1 and others should not be lost sight of as that conduct also reflects towards the guilt of the accused. In this connection, the guidelines have been given by the Apex Court in the cases reported in AIR 1981 SC 1991, Atley v. State of U.P., AIR 1955 SC 307 . State of M.P. v. Hari Prasad, AIR 1974 SC 1740 ' and also Udai Pal Singh v. State of U.P., AIR 1972 SC 54 and lastly Nanak v. State of U.P., 1983 (20) ACC 346 (SC) . In the decision of Nanak v. State of U.P. wife was murdered by her husband. In the said case the court held that variety of motive may be there but it is difficult to ascertain it. It was further held that acquittal of the accused on the ground of absence of motive is not justified. In the case of Anant Chintamon v. State of Bombay , Hon'ble Supreme Court held that in criminal trial the conduct of the accused is very much material. This decision is reported in AIR 1960 S.C. page 500. The fact that the accused appellant tried to run away from the place of occurrence and was caught hold of by P.W. 1 and his sons and after taking into consideration the other facts as observed above and in view of the discussions made above, we do not find anything to deviate the evidence and order of punishment passed by the learned court below. The appeal stands dismissed. The bail bonds stand cancelled. Learned Court below should direct the sureties and take such other steps to have the presence of the accused and send him to jail to serve out the sentence. Appeal Dismissed.;