JUDGMENT B.N. Katju, J. - Hem Chandra Lohani has filed this appeal against the judgment of Sessions Judge, Almora dated 18th December, 1987 passed in Sessions Trial No. 43 of 1986 convicting him under Section 302 and 201 Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to death and 5 years' R.I. respectively. 2. The case of the prosecution is that Hem Chandra Lohani appellant committed murder of his wife Smt. Chandrakala deceased between 30-6-82 and 6-7-82 in village Lohana, Patti Melia Syonara l'ehsil, District Almora and concealed the dead body of the deceased in Maharkhali jungle of village Lohana with the intention of screening himself from legal punishment. On 2-7-82 report Ext. Ka 3 was lodged by Damodar Lohani, father of the Appellant, with the Patwari of Kabetra Amkoli regarding the disappearance of the deceased. On 4-7-82 at 12 noon First Information Report (Ext. Ka 1) was lodged by Anand Ballabh Pant (P. W. 7) father of the deceased with the Patwari, Kabetra Amkoli. The body of the deceased was recovered by Ramesh Chandra (P.W. 3) on 6-7-82 from the jungle of village Lohana. The post mortem examination was conducted by Dr. S.C. Bhootania on 7-7-82 at 2.35 P. M. and undermentioned post mortem injury was found on the body of the deceased : "Inner side of left thigh 6 inch x 4 inch are in the bitten up by Jakals and any other animal After death, 3 inch below the Growing." 3. As no opinion could be given by Dr. viceraa regarding the cause of death of the deceased the viscera of the deceased was preserved and was sent to the Chemical Examiner. The report of the Chemical Examiner (Ex. Ka 26) shows that alcohol poison was found in the viscera of the deceased. The prosecution examined 8 witnesses to connect the appellant with the crime, namely, Sri Prakash Chandra Pathak, Hand Writing Expert (P.W. 1), Mathura Datt (P.W. 2), Ramesh Chandra (P.W. 3), Basant Ballabh (P.W. 4), Dr. S. C. Bhutania (P.W. 5), Dinesh Chandra (P.W.6) Anand Ballabh (P.W. 7) and Iushal Singh Koranga Investigating Officer P.W. 8). The appellant pleaded not guilty and stated that he was implicated falsely. The Trial Court after considering the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the guilt of the appellant and convicted and sentenced him as mentioned earlier. 4. The appellant pleaded not guilty and stated that he was implicated falsely. The Trial Court after considering the evidence on record came to the conclusion that the prosecution has succeeded in establishing the guilt of the appellant and convicted and sentenced him as mentioned earlier. 4. Anand Ballabh (P.W. 7) deposed that his daughter Smt. Chandrakala, deceased was married to the appellant on 26-4-82. The appellant was working at Kath Godam in a factory. After his marriage the appellant first demanded Rs. 2,000/- and he gave him Rs. 1,500/-. About a month thereafter when he came to his house to leave the deceased he demanded Rs. 12,000/- from the deceased and his wife, but he was unable to pay him this amount. The appellant told the deceased before leaving his house that until she obtained the said amount she should not return to his house. The appellant also sent him letters demanding money from him. On 25-6-82 the deceased sent from his house to the house of the appellant. His son went to leave her. The deceased told his wife that as the money had not been given to the appellant she would not see her again as the appellant would kill her. The deceased also told her brother that she was harassed by the appellant. On 29-6-82 the appellant returned to his house in village Lohana from Kath Godam via Rani Khet. In Rani Khet the appellant had told Hira Ballabh that he should make him give Rs. 12,000/- to the appellant. This was conveyed to him by a milkman who said that the money should be sent to Kira Ballabh but he could not sent it. On 2-7-82 he was informed by Bipin Chandra of his village that he had been informed by the brother of the appellant that Smt. Chandrakala deceased was missing since the last three days. On the next day he and his sons. Dinesh and Bhwan, went to Rani Khet and from there to village Lohana where he was told that the deceased was missing since two or three days. They went to the house of appellant and he told him that he had committed the murder of his daughter by administering poison to her but the appellant denied having done so. He then lodged report (Ex. Ka 11) with the Patwari. Nothing has been brought out in cross- examination to shake his evidence. They went to the house of appellant and he told him that he had committed the murder of his daughter by administering poison to her but the appellant denied having done so. He then lodged report (Ex. Ka 11) with the Patwari. Nothing has been brought out in cross- examination to shake his evidence. In our opinion his evidence is reliable. 5. Dinesh Chandra (PW 6) corroborated the statement of his father, Anand Ballabh (P W 7). Nothing has been brought out in his cross-examination to shake his credit. In our opinion his evidence is also reliable. Ramesh Chandra (P.W. 3) deposed that he knew the appellant as he lived in his village Lohana. The appellant was married. On 30-6-82 his wife left his house. A search was made for her but she was not found. After six days her body was recovered and he informed the Patwari regarding it by his report (Ex. Ka 4). The body of the deceased was identified by the appellant and his relations and other villagers. He was not cross-examined. His evidence is also reliable. Mathura Datt deposed that he is the Pradhan of village Lohana. The appellant was known to him as he resided in the same village. He was married in April, 1982. On 30-6-82 he received information at 10.00 P.M. from Damodar, father of the appellant, that his daughter-in-law had gone to cut bamboos but had not returned. He then went along with others to the house of Damodar. A search was made for the deceased but she was not found. A report regarding the disappearance of the deceased was made by Damodar on 2-7-82 which was sent to the Patwari. On 6-7-82 the body of the deceased was found in the jungle. Nothing has been brought out in his cross-examination to shake his evidence. In our opinion his evidence is also reliable. Dr. S.C. Bhutania (P.W. 5) deposed that he conducted the post-mortem exam nation on the body of the deceased on 7-7-82 at 2.35 P. M. The cause of death could not be known. The deceased had died about 8-10 days earlier. Viscera of the deceased was preserved. He was not cross-examined. His evidence is also reliable. The report of the Chemical Examiner shows that alcohol poison was found in the viscera of the deceased. The deceased had died about 8-10 days earlier. Viscera of the deceased was preserved. He was not cross-examined. His evidence is also reliable. The report of the Chemical Examiner shows that alcohol poison was found in the viscera of the deceased. The evidence of P. S. Pathak, the handwriting expert, is of no value as it has not been established that the specimen handwriting, with which the letters alleged to have been written by the appellant were compared, was in the handwriting of the appellant. 6. The prosecution has thus established that the appellant demanded Rs. 12,000/- from the deceased and her father, Arland Ballah (P.W. 7), which was not given to him. There was thus motive for the appellant to have committed the murder of the deceased. As there is no other evidence to connect the appellant with the crime this is insufficient to establish his guilt under Sections 302 and 201, Indian Penal Code. 7. This appeal is accordingly allowed and the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 and 201, Indian Penal Code and the sentences awarded to him thereunder are set aside. The appellant is in jail. He shall be released forthwith unless wanted in any other case. The reference made by the learned Judge for the confirmation of death sentence awarded to the appellant is rejected.