BYAS, J.—By his judgment dated February 26, 1979 the learned Sessions Judge, Bhilwara has convicted the accused Chhogalal under secs. 302 and 379, I.P.C. and sentenced him of imprisonment for life on the first and two years rigorous imprisonment on the second count. Both these sentences were directed to run concurrently. The accused has come up in appeal to challenge his conviction and sentence. 2. Smt. Nandu, the deceased victim in the case, aged about 17 years was the daughter of PW 5 Lalu Chamar of village Dhuwala P.S. Mandal district Bhilwara and was living with him. A few days before the occurrence (January 11, 1978) she was married to Kana Chamar of village Mandal. After marriage Smt. Nandu came to her parents. In the afternoon of January 11, 1978 she went to the accuseds house to get a ring prepared from him. Thereafter she was not seen alive When she went to the accuseds house in the afternoon, she was wearing numerous silver ornaments e.g. Oganiya, Hansli, Madaliyas, Dodiya, Kangariya and Kariyas etc. When she did not return to her parental house, effots were made to trace her out but with no success. On January 18, 1978 her deadbody was found on the Ibank of a pond situate nearby village Dhuwala. Report Ex P.I was drawn up by Patal Deo Karan and was sent to Police Station, Mandal. As the Station House Officer Kalyansingh (PW 27) was out of the Headquarters, no action could be taken on that day. The Station House Officer resumed duty on Jan. 19, 1978. On that day he arrived at the spot where the deadbody was lying and prepared the inquest report. Near the victims dead body some gram and were lying scattered. There were seized. The post mortem examination of the victims deadbody was conducted on the same day by PW 25 Dr. G.C. Mahajan, the then Medical Officer Incharge, Government Dispensary, Mandal. The following injury was found on the victims neck: "Bruise 2" x 1" on left side neck 1/2" below the sub-mandibular region!" away from the medical line. Some other abrasions were also found in the vagina, semen was present which was collected and preserved." 3. In the opinion of Dr. Mahajan. the cause of death of the victim was as phyxia resulting from throttling. He was also of the opinion that sexual intercouse was committed with her before death. Some other abrasions were also found in the vagina, semen was present which was collected and preserved." 3. In the opinion of Dr. Mahajan. the cause of death of the victim was as phyxia resulting from throttling. He was also of the opinion that sexual intercouse was committed with her before death. He prepared report Ex. P. 18. Since the death of Smt. Nandu was not natural, a case under section 302, IPC was registered at about 3.30 P.M on the same day. The accused was arrested on January 23, 1978. In consequence of the disclosure statement made by him, silver ornaments Dodiyas (Article 5) was recovered from a Sarraf, to whom the appellant had sold them. Some silver ingots were also recovered from the persons to whom he had sold them. The suggestion was that the accused had melted the silver ornaments of the victim and sold their melten pieces. A ring was also recovered from the possession of the accused, which also belonged to the deceased-victim. It also transpired during investigation that the appellant after committing the murder of the victim put her dead body in a gunny bag and took it on a bicycle towards the tank In consequence of the information furnished by the accused, the gunny bag. the rope and the pieces of cloth used in the commission of the offence and in taking the dead body were also discovered. The accuseds wife Smt. Chandi was also arrested by the Investigating Officer on January 29, 1978 On the completion of investigation, the police submitted a challan against the appellant and his wife Smt. Chandi, in the Court of Judicial Magistrate (3), Bhilwara, who in his turn committed the case for trial to the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge framed charges under section 302 and 379 against the appellant and under section 414, IPC against his wife Smt. Chandi, to which they pleaded not guilty and faced the trial. During trial, the prosecution examined as many as 27 witnesses and filed some documents. In defence the accused adduced no evidence on the conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge found no incriminating material as against accused Smt. Chandi. She was, therefore, acquitted. The charges were held duly proved against the appellant. He was consequently convicted and sentenced as mentioned above. 4. We have heard the learned Amicus curiae and the learned Public Prosecutor. In defence the accused adduced no evidence on the conclusion of trial, the learned Sessions Judge found no incriminating material as against accused Smt. Chandi. She was, therefore, acquitted. The charges were held duly proved against the appellant. He was consequently convicted and sentenced as mentioned above. 4. We have heard the learned Amicus curiae and the learned Public Prosecutor. We have also gone through the case file carefully. 5. The cause of death of Smt. Nandu has not been assailed before us. We have gone through the testimony of Dr. G.C. Mahajan (PW 5). We have no reasons to disagree with him that the case of death of the victim was that as stated by him. It, therefore, stands established that the cause of death of the victim was asphyxia resulting from throttling. The death of the victim was, thus, not natural but homicidal in nature. 6. Before proceeding further, it may be poined out that there is no direct evidence against the accused. The prosecution case rests squarely on circumstantial evidence. The circumstantial evidence adduced by the prosecution may, for the sake of convenience, be classified as under:— 1. The victim went to the house of the accused in the afternoon of January 11, 1978. Thereafter she was not seen alive. 2. Before going to the house of accused, Smt. Nandu (the victim) had gone to jungle to coMect the firewood alongwith her brothers wife (Bhabhi) (PW 7) Smt. Sohni. There Smt. Nandu took ring Article 4 from Smt. Sohni as she wanted to have a ring prepared for herself of that design. This ring Article 4 was recovered from the possession of the accused in consequence of the information furnished by him. 3. The victim went to the house of the accused wearing numerous silver ornaments including the pair of silver Dodiya (Article 5). In consequence of the information furnished by him, the pair of silver Dodiyas (Article 5) and some other melted pieces of silver were recovered from different persons to whom he had sold them. 4. He was seen going on a bicycle with a gunny bag on the carrier. In consequence of the information furnished by the appellant, one piece of cloth was recovered from a place nearby the tank. A piece of the same cloth was recovered in consequence of the information furnished by the accused from his house. 7. 4. He was seen going on a bicycle with a gunny bag on the carrier. In consequence of the information furnished by the appellant, one piece of cloth was recovered from a place nearby the tank. A piece of the same cloth was recovered in consequence of the information furnished by the accused from his house. 7. It was vehemently contended by the learned Amicus curiae that in the first instance, these sets of circumstantial evidence do not stand proved. The learned Sessions Judge acted merely on surmises and conjectures in taking these sets of circumstances are taken as fully proved. It was next argued that even if these sets of circumstances are taken as duly proved they are not sufficient to suggest affirmatively that the victim was done to death by the appellant. In reply, the learned Public Prosecutor supported the findings of the learned Sessions Judge and submitted that the various circumstances fully indicate the complicity of the appellant in the commission of the murder of the victim. We have taken the respective submissions into consideration. 8. We propose to examine each set of evidence at seriatim. Re: 1: It was alleged that the victim Smt Nandu went in the afternoon of January 11, 1978 to the house of the accused to get a ring prepared. There after she was not seen alive. The prosecution has examined three witnesses in this regard. PW 13 Balu Ram Sunar, who is a caste fellow of the accused, deposed that at about 4.00 P.M. on January 11, 1978 he had seen Smt. Nandu entering the house of the accused. When she went there, she was wearing numerous silver ornaments. In the evening, the brother of the victim came there at the accuseds house and knocked at the door but with no reply. The house of this witness is situate near to that of the accused. PW 6 Nanuram is the brother of the victim. He deposed that on being informed by her mother that Smt. Nandu had gone to the house of the accused, he went there and knocked at the door. He also gave three or four calls but nobody opened the door. Nobody responded from inside He came back and told his father that there was no response from the accuseds house. He deposed that on being informed by her mother that Smt. Nandu had gone to the house of the accused, he went there and knocked at the door. He also gave three or four calls but nobody opened the door. Nobody responded from inside He came back and told his father that there was no response from the accuseds house. His father told that Nandu might have gone to the house of her mothers parents PW 7 Smt. Sohni is the aunt of the victim. She stated that on the day of occurrence, she and Smt. Nandu went in the jungle to collect the firewood. There Smt Nandu asked her to give her ring (Art. 4) to her because she also wanted a similar ring prepared from the accused. She (witness) gave her ring Article 4. On that day, Smt. Nandu was wearing numerous silver ornaments. All these witnesses were cross-examined at length but with nothing to help the accused. The learned Sessions Judge did not accept the evidence of these witnesses on the ground that these witnesses remained silent till the case was registered with the police and the deadbody of the victim was recovered. In our opinion, the approach of the learned Sessions Judge was not correct. These witnesses remained silent till the victims deadbody was found because they were under the impression that she had gone to the house of her mothers parents. We should not forget that Smt Nandu and her parents are members of a poor class and reside in village. They had nothing to suspect that Smt Nandu was killed by the accused till her dead body was recovered. In these circumstances the silence or inaction of these witnesses has no significance. We are of the opinion that the evidence of these witnesses establishes the fact that the victim entered the house of the accused in the afternoon of January 11, 1978 and thereafter she was not seen alive. 9. Re. 2. There is the direct testimony of PW 7 Smt. Sohni on the point. She deposed that on the day of occurrence she and the deceased-victim Smt. Nandu went in the jungle to bring firewood. They returned at about 4.00 P M. Smt. Nandu asked her to give her ring (Article 4) to her as she also wanted to get a ring prepared of that design. She deposed that on the day of occurrence she and the deceased-victim Smt. Nandu went in the jungle to bring firewood. They returned at about 4.00 P M. Smt. Nandu asked her to give her ring (Article 4) to her as she also wanted to get a ring prepared of that design. She gave her ring (Article 4) to Smt. Nandu and told her that she might get it prepared from the accused. This witness is the aunt of the victim. There is nothing in her testimony to discredit or disbelieve what she testified on oath. 10. Ring (Article 4) was recovered from the possession of the accused in consequence of the information furnished by him. He was arrested on January 23, 1978 vide arrest memo Ex. P 7. The Investigating Officer Kaliyan Singh (PW 27) deposed that on January 26, 1978 the accused gave him the information which he recorded in Ex. P. 29. The information was to the effect that he had placed the currency notes and a ring in a trunk which he had placed in his house. The Accused thereafter took him and the Motbirs to his house and opened a trunk. From the trunk he took out ring (Art. 4) and two silver Kangariyas. They were seized and sealed. PW 14 Udai Singh is a Motbir of this recovery. He deposed that he was called as a Motbir by the police. The accused was then under arrest. The accused took the police and him to his house. There the accused took out ring (Article 4) and Kangariyas from a trunk. Of course, in cross-examination he admitted that the ring and Kangariyas were actually taken out from the trunk by the accuseds wife but that makes no difference as regards the accused. It was he who gave the information that he had places ring (Article 4) in a trunk lying in his house. 11. Ring (Article 4) was correctly identified by PW7 Smt. Sohni during trial as well as in the test identification conducted by a Judicial Magistrate. The test identification memo is Ex. P. 16. It was conducted by FW 22 Shri Bhanwarlal, the then Munsifand Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara on March 15, 1978. The accused has not laid claim on ring (Art 4). It, thus, stands proved that the ring (Article 4) belonged to PW 7 Smt Sohni. The test identification memo is Ex. P. 16. It was conducted by FW 22 Shri Bhanwarlal, the then Munsifand Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara on March 15, 1978. The accused has not laid claim on ring (Art 4). It, thus, stands proved that the ring (Article 4) belonged to PW 7 Smt Sohni. She gave it to the deceased-victim as the latter wanted to have a ring prepared of that design. The recovery of ring (Article 4) from the possession of the accused in consequence of the information furnished by him whilst under police custody constitutes a very valuable link of circumstantial evidence against him. 12. Re. 3.—The next set of evidence is that the victim went to the house of accused wearing numerous silver ornaments as such as Kariyas, Hansli, Madliya, Oganiya, Khunt and Dodiya. The accused, after finishing her, got these ornaments melted. However, the pair of Dodiya (Article 5) remained unmelted. He sold the ingots and Dodiya (Article 5) to the different Sharrafs at Bhilwara. The prosecution has examined numerous witnesses on this point. 13. P.W. 7 Smt. Sohni deposed that when the victim went with her in the jungle on the clay of incident to bring the firewood, she was wearing all these ornaments including the pair of Dodiyas (Art. 5). She was cross-examined but there is no thing to put her testimony at the discredit PW6 Nanuram is the real brother of the victim. He also deposed that when Smt. Nandu came from her-in-laws house, she was wearing all these ornaments including the pair of Dodiya (Article 5). So also PW 5 Lalu, who is the victims father, deposed that the victim was wearing all these ornaments. PW 11 Smt. Keki is the mother in law of the deceased-victim. She deposed that when Smt. Nandu came from her house, she was wearing all these ornaments including the pair of Dodiya (Art. 5). She correctly identified these Dodiyas (Article 5) during trial and also in test identification conducted on May 13, 1978 by PW 22 Shri Bhanwarlal,, the then Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Bhilwara. The accused has not laid any claim on this pair of Dodiyas (Art. 5). We have, therefore, no difficulty to accept that when Smt. Nandu went to the house of accused, she was wearing numerous silver ornaments including the part of Dodiyas (Article 5). 14. The accused has not laid any claim on this pair of Dodiyas (Art. 5). We have, therefore, no difficulty to accept that when Smt. Nandu went to the house of accused, she was wearing numerous silver ornaments including the part of Dodiyas (Article 5). 14. As stated earlier, the accused was arrested on January 23, 1978. The Investigating Officer Kaliyan Singh (PW 27) deposed that after his arrest the accused made a disclosure statement before him which he recorded in Ex. P. 28 on January 23, 1978. The accused in this statement gave him information that he had melted the silver ornaments. He had sold the ingots of these ornaments and pair of Dodiyas (Arts. 5) in original to the different persons viz. Ramesh Chandra Samdari (PW18) Ladu Lal Mahajan (PW24) and Bal Mukand. The accused also gave the information that he had sold Dodiyas (Art. 5) to PW 24 Ladu Lal The Investigating Officer further deposed that in consequence of the said information, the accused took him to Bhilwara and got silver ingets (Article 9) recovered from the shop of Ram Chandra (PW 18). He further deposed that the accused got silver Dodiyas (Article 5) and the silver ingots (Article 7) recovered from the shop of PW 24 Ladulal Mahajan at Bhilwara. The Investigating Officer also deposed that the accused got the silver ingots (Article 8) recovered from the shop of Rampal (PW 19). The seizure memos of these recoveries are Ex. P. 10, Ex. P 11 and Ex, P. 13. The Motbir witnesses speaking about these recoveries are PW 18 Ramesh Chandra, PW 19 Rampal, PW 24 Ladulal and PW 17 Godilal. Of course, the Motbir stated that the recoveries were made at the shops of the above persons at Bhilwara, but the Investigating Officer Kaliyan Singh (PW 27) deposed that Rampal had brought the silver ingots (Article 8) at the Police Station. But the seizure memo Ex. P. 10 doss not state so Ex. P. 10 shows that the police went to the shop of Rampal and there got the silver ingots (Article 8) recovered. It appears that due to loss of memory PW 27 the Investigating Officer Kaliyansingh forgot the matter. Any way, the testimony of the above witnesses establishes that the accused sold that silver ingots and Dodiyas (Article 5) to different Sarrafs at Bhilwara after January 11, 1978 ie. It appears that due to loss of memory PW 27 the Investigating Officer Kaliyansingh forgot the matter. Any way, the testimony of the above witnesses establishes that the accused sold that silver ingots and Dodiyas (Article 5) to different Sarrafs at Bhilwara after January 11, 1978 ie. the commission of the murder of decesed victim Smt. Nandu. The accused has not laid any claim on these silver ingots and Dodiyas ( Article 5). Dodiyas (Article 5), as discussed above, have been correctly identified by Smt. Keki (PW 11) as that which the deceased-victim was wearing. The accused has merely denied his giving the information or getting these articles recovered at his instance. There is no truth in his denial. We cannot expect that the Investigating Officer would plant the false recoveries of the silver ingots and Dodiyas, the value of which runs in some hundreds of rupees. We are also unable to imagine that PW 17 Gotulal, PW 18 Ram Chandra, PW 19, Rampal and PW 24 Ladulal would speak falsely against the accused for no apparent reasons. They cannot be expected to form a conspiracy so as to falsely implicate the accused with whom they bear no enmity. 15. The last set of evidence is that he had hired a bicycle and was seen going with a heavy gunny bag on its carrier in the night of January 11. 1978. PW 15 Kailash Chandra runs a bicycle shop at Mandal. He deposed that the accused came to him at about 9.00 P.M. on January 11,1978 and took his bicycle (Article 6) on hire. The accused returned the bicycle in the morning of January 13. 1978. This bicycle was seized and sealed. In cross-examination he deposed that the accused used to hire bicycles from him off and on. PW 12 Banshilal deposed that at about 3 00 A.M. on a day before Sakaranti of 1978, he was going to Mandal to supply milk as usual. When he happened to pass out side the house of the accused, the accused came out with a bicycle. There was a heavy load on the carrier of the bic>cle of the accused. 16. After his arrest, the accused gave the informations on January 23, 1978, January 24, 1978 and January 26, 1978. We have already dealt with various recoveries made in consequence of the information furnished on January 23, 1978. 17. There was a heavy load on the carrier of the bic>cle of the accused. 16. After his arrest, the accused gave the informations on January 23, 1978, January 24, 1978 and January 26, 1978. We have already dealt with various recoveries made in consequence of the information furnished on January 23, 1978. 17. Shri Bhupal Singh (PW 26), Deputy Superintendent of Police deposed that on January 24, 1978 the accused gave him information which he recorded in Ex.P.20. In consequence of it he took him and the Motbirs near the bank of the pond and there got a gunny bag, a blood stained cloth and other articles recovered. The recovery memo of these articles is Ex. P. 3. The witness further stated that on the same day he also gave information which he recorded in Ex.P. 21. This information was that he had placed a piece of cloth in his house. The piece of cloth (Art. 11) was thereafter recovered from his house. On chemiced examination, both the pieces of clothes (article 10 and article 11 ) were found similar as regards colour, thread, fibre and weaving as per report Ex. P. 33 of the State Forensic Science Laboratory, Jaipur. The fact that the two pieces of cloth Articles 10 and Article 11 are of the same fibre, colour etc. shows that the piece of cloth article 10 found on the bank of pond was that of the accused with which he tied to gunny bag etc. The similarity in these two pieces of clothes Articles 10 and 11 cannot be dismissed as a mere coincidence. The similarity in these two pieces of cloth affords a very valuable piece of evidence against the accused. 18. As stated earlier, there is no direct evidence against, the accused. But the circumstantial evidence accused against him is so overwhelming that it unerringly points out the guilt of the accused. The various links in the chain of circumstantial evidence are:— (1) Smt. Nandu went to the house of the accused in the after-noon of January 11, 1978 and thereafter she was not seen alive: (2) When she entered the accuseds house, she was wearing silver ornaments including the pair of Dodiyas (Article 5). The various links in the chain of circumstantial evidence are:— (1) Smt. Nandu went to the house of the accused in the after-noon of January 11, 1978 and thereafter she was not seen alive: (2) When she entered the accuseds house, she was wearing silver ornaments including the pair of Dodiyas (Article 5). She had also ring (Article 4) with her; (3) Ring (Article 4) and Dodiyas (Article 5) were recovered in consequ-ence of the informations furnished by the accused whilst under police custody; (4) The accused had no occasion to sell the silver ingots in such a huge quantity to the different persons and; (5) He hired a bicycle and was seen with a heavy load on its carrier. The two pieces of cloth one found on the bank of pond near the victims deadbody and the other found in his house tally with each other as regards colour, fibre, texture etc. 19. These various links in the circumstantial evidence leave no room to doubt that Smt. Nandu was done to death by the accused and the accused alone. No inference other than the guilt of the accused can be drawn from these proved circumstances. The accused was, therefore, rightly convicted and sentenced and no interference is called for. 20. In the result, the appeal of accused Chhoga alias Chhoga Lal is hereby dismissed.