G.R.MOOLCHANDANI,J. - (1.) The instant appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 17.1.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No.2, Pali in Sessions Case No.31/2006, by which the learned trial Court has convicted the accused appellant under Section 302 Indian Procedure Code for life imprisonment with a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default further to undergo three years simple imprisonment and under Section 201 Indian Procedure Code for seven years imprisonment and with a fine of Rs.500, in default, further to undergo one year's simple imprisonment.
(2.) The allegations as mentioned in the FIR goes to reveal as under:- ...[VARNACULAR TEXT OMITTED]...
(3.) Heard submission of both the sides, placing reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court as rendered in Inspector of Police, Tamil Nadu v. Palanisamy alias Selvan, (2009) 2 SCC (Cri) 844 , learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the trial court has committed material illegality and perversity in passing the impugned judgment and has faulted in arriving at conclusion of guilt, there was no direct evidence, the case of the prosecution is based on circumstantial evidence and the links relating thereto have not been properly connected, majority of the witnesses of prosecution have become hostile. "PW-2 Amba Lal" is not a trustworthy witness, since theory of extra judicial confession, which has been invented through this witness does not substantiate being contradictory and baseless, there are important contradictions in testimony of this witness, he has himself controverted several say of police statements, he has twice been testified, Amba Lal as well as Gopal were actually involved in crime since both were detained by the police authorities and they were interrogated under custodial predicament, which goes to show that there was intense propensity of doubt and involvement of both these witnesses in the crime and without any reason the appellant was framed. Because of no offence and unnatural burnt death under the provisions of Section 174/176 of Cr.P.C. Proceedings for morgue were conducted by Executive Magistrate and after concocting fable, false report was lodged belatedly without any legal ground. Learned counsel has further contended that appellant-accused was illegally detained by the police authorities prior to the alleged arrest memo, which is very much apparent from the record and Ex.P.1, which has got interpolation of dates and overwriting, which too is admitted by the prosecution and this goes to reveal that fabrication of record was malafidely prepared to involve innocent appellant. Entire evidence goes to show that deceased Payal was a poor girl, her father was serving sentence for murder, even the marriage expenditures were borne by the accused himself, so allegation regarding any demand automatically negates, and nullified, the recovery is also not established, alleged dictum of extra judicial confession says that the deceased was strangulated whereas a knife by which alleged stains of wall, stated to have been scratched and wiped away, has been recovered without authenticity of any recovery witness. It has further been contended that cause of death has also not been established and story of the prosecution suggest that the accused had left the place after handing over key of his house to neighbour Gopal, who too has accepted this version in his testimony being PW 4, alleged disclosure of extra judicial confession becomes wrong because Amba Lal has himself said that when he visited at the house of the accused, then 'Payal' was not there and contrary to it alleged story has been brought with the allegations, as if, that burnt dead body of deceased 'Payal' was inside the room, which is quite contrary and unnatural. The post-mortem report and report of viscera does not reveal cause of death of the deceased and all these go to divulge that prosecution has miserably failed in establishing its case and the impugned judgment is not sustainable at all, so it be set aside after allowing the appeal. Learned Public Prosecutor has contended that the prosecution has proved its case, beyond all reasonable doubts, there were strained relation between the couple and accused was repeatedly demanding dowry, which has properly been conveyed by all the witnesses of the prosecution. Body of the deceased was found in the premises of the accused, recovery of weapon has also been made on his information, the accused has eliminated his wife within a year of marriage, testimony of prosecution is reliable and there is no error in the findings of learned trial court. The appeal does not weigh any merit, so it be dismissed.;