M. Jeyapaul, J. - (1.) ACCUSED Santro and Vinod Kumar, who were convicted for offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/ - each and in default to undergo further period of two months each and for offence under Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code and were sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/ - each and in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month each, have preferred the present appeal.
(2.) THE case in brief of the prosecution as reflected from the witnesses examined on their side is as follows: Accused Santro was the wife of the deceased Dharambir. P.W. 2 Krishan Kumar had agricultural land. He had given the same for cultivation to the deceased Dharambir and Chander Bhan. Dharambir, his wife, children and accused Vinod Kumar, who was the brother -in -law of the sister of Dharambir in one portion of the house in the field of P.W. 2.
(3.) ACCUSED Santro, wife of the deceased Dharambir having been informed of dead body lying in the water tank constructed in the field of P.W. 1 Beer Singh, Sarpanch, gave a statement to P.W. 14 ASI Mohinder Singh on 26.07.2006 that her husband Dharambir, who was mentally upset for some days for unknown reasons used to take intoxicants. On 24.07.2006 the family members after taking meals went to bed. But in the morning Dharambir was found missing. Both the accused made a search. The relatives were contacted over phone. But no clue was provided by anybody. It was only P.W. 1 Beer Singh, Sarpanch, who informed Santro about the dead body lying in the water tank constructed in his fields. The dead body was identified as Dharambir. She has further stated in her statement that Dharambir might have fallen into the water tank under the effect of intoxicants, but nobody could be found fault with.;