JUDGMENT D. P. Sood, J—Accused Pawan Kumar is the son of his co-accused Shakuntla Devi. They were tried, convicted and sentenced vide judgment, dated February 23, 1987 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, the details of which are as under; St. No. Name Particulars of the offence under which convicted. Sentence with period etc. Sentence in default of payment of fine. 1. Shakuntla Devi (a) under section 302, I. P. C. (b) under section 201, I. P. C. Life imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000. Six months and fine of Rs. 500. S. I. for three months. S. I. for two months. 2. Pawan Kumar under section 201, I P. C. Sentenced to undergo the period already spent in jail and fine of Rs. 500. S. I. for two months. 2. The aforesaid judgment has been assailed by both the appellants. 3. The prosecution case in brief is that the occurrence took place in village Gahghori Smt Bimla Devi (since deceased) was the wife of accused Pawan Kumar. They were married a year prior to the occurrence Both led normal married life for about 2 months but thereafter strained relations cropped up between the deceased and her mother-in-law, namely, accused Shakuntla Devi. This marriage was by way of exchange of the marriage of Asha Devi, daughter of accused Shakuntla with Mast Ram, brother of the deceased. On June 7,1986, Pawan Kumar, accused, informed the parents of the deceased that the latter was missing since the morning of that date. Both the accused searched for her and ultimately on June 9, 1986, Pawan Kumar, accused, in the company of his mother lodged a report at Police Station, Talai regarding the aforesaid fact. On the same day, Banta Ram, another brother of the deceased had also reported to the police by filing a complaint. However, on the following day, the dead body of deceased Bimla Devi was found floating in ‘Karah-kund (a small body of still water). On the basis of information imparted to the police by PW Karam Chand. PW 21 Munshi Ram, SHO, visited the spot, visually inspected the dead-body and after getting it photographed, despatched the same for post mortem examination Thereafter he also recorded the statement of PW 7 Lachman Dass, father of the deceased under section 154 Cr. P. C, upon which a case under section 306 I. P. C. was registered. PW 21 Munshi Ram, SHO, visited the spot, visually inspected the dead-body and after getting it photographed, despatched the same for post mortem examination Thereafter he also recorded the statement of PW 7 Lachman Dass, father of the deceased under section 154 Cr. P. C, upon which a case under section 306 I. P. C. was registered. However, after receipt of the postmortem report, the case was converted into one under section 302, I. P. C. Both the accused were then arrested for the commission of the offence. During investigation, disclosure statement of accused Shakuntla Devi was recorded which resulted into the discovery of blow iron pipe from Awan (upper storey of the house). On completion of investigation, accused Shakuntla Devi was prosecuted for the commission of the offence under section 302 and 201, I. P. C whereas her son accused Pawan Kumar was prosecuted for the commission of the offence under section 201 I. P. C. 4. Both the accused abjured the guilt and pleaded false implication under section 313 Cr. P. C. They raised the defence of denial simplicitor and contended that the deceased and accused Pawan Kumar were residing separately. 5. PW 1 Dr. S. N. Agnihotri conducted the postmortem and observed the following; “…………Condition of body : Condition of stout young lady in the state of decomposition. Maggots were present on the body. Skin had greenish discolouration with formation of multiple blisters all over the body and at places the skin was peeled off- Hair intact, eyes bulging out of socket, cornia white and blood stained fluid was present in both the nostrils and tongue swollen and protuded out of mouth. Blood stained fluid coming out of the mouth. No ligature mark was present on the neck. Faceal matters coming out from anal on-fice and blood stained fluid was coming out of vaginal on-fice. Injuries on the body . Forehead 3 A lacerated wound over the middle of the fore-head was present. The wound was 2" X ½" into bone deep with underline fracture of the frontal bone. Area redness and swelling was present around the wound. This injury was ante-mortem. 2. Burn injuries s (a) On the face involving maxiallary prominence of the face and tip of the nose, lips, and anterior aspect of the chin and anterior and lateral aspect of the neck and anterior aspect of the sterna were found burnt. Area redness and swelling was present around the wound. This injury was ante-mortem. 2. Burn injuries s (a) On the face involving maxiallary prominence of the face and tip of the nose, lips, and anterior aspect of the chin and anterior and lateral aspect of the neck and anterior aspect of the sterna were found burnt. (b) Both the fore-arms having burns on the dorsel and medial aspect of the fore-arms. Right elbow joint and both the dorsel aspect of the right and left hand and fingers were burnt. These burns were of ante-mortem in nature and of second and third degree type. At places blisters formation were present. Examination of skull: Fracture of the frontal bone corresponding to injuries mentioned as above, and fracture of occipital prominence 2" right to the middle brain in the state of decomposition and blood fluid present in the cranium. Examination of thorax: Abdomen : Liver, spleen, kidneys normal and in the state of decomposition...... Organs of generation external and internal: .................Injuries to the muscles, bones and joints as mentioned above." 6. Tie trial Court on consideration of the entire evidence convicted and sentenced both the accused as indicated above. 7. Mr. M. G. Chitkara, learned Counsel for the appellants has urged before us that the learned Court below failed to appreciate the inherent infirmities in the prosecution evidence inasmuch as there is no legal evidence to support the findings. It was maintained that there was no eye-witness with respect to the commission of murder. The mere fact of existence of injuries on the forehead coupled with the statement of Dr Agnihotri (PW i) to the effect that the skull fracture could be caused by blow iron pipe (P-6) and burn injuries on the hands could be sustained if the deceased had fallen while covering her forehead with the hands resulting in intra craneal bleeding and consequent death of the deceased, cannot in any way connect the accused Shakuntla Devi with the crime. Further that the said iron pipe P-6 had no blood stains on it nor it is linked with the commission of offence by direct or circumstantial evidence. Apart from it, the alleged disclosure statement Ex. PK has no value in the eye of law nor it in any way connects accused Shakuntla Devi with the offence under section 302 I. P. C. 8. Apart from it, the alleged disclosure statement Ex. PK has no value in the eye of law nor it in any way connects accused Shakuntla Devi with the offence under section 302 I. P. C. 8. Before discussing the prosecution evidence, certain facts are necessary to be detailed. The accused are residents of village Gahghori which is one of the remotest corner of Bilaspur District and located at a distance of about 40 kros. from Police Station Talaia. The nearest road from the spot is Jaijwin which is about 7-8 kms, from the said village. Even the bus service at Jaijwin is not very frequent and is restricted to twice a day. Bilaspur town is approachable through Govindsagar Dam but there is no regular ferry service The important question for determination is whether accused Shakuntla Devi is the perpetrator of the crime in question or not. 9. The entire prosecution case rests on circumstantial evidence. As regards the appellants, the circumstances relied upon the prosecution for the commission of crime under section 302 I P. C. by accused Shakuntla Devi is concerned are (i) motive ; (ii) medical evidence ; (iii) last seen theory ; and (iv) disclosure statement of accused Shakuntla Devi under section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and consequent recovery of iron pipe (P-6) thereto. 10. It is to be noted that factum of extra-judicial confession having been made to one PW 10 Chandu Ram has been discarded by the trial Court. With respect to the commission of offence under section 20! I. P. C. by both the accused, now appellants, the additional piece of evidence is in the form of direct evidence of PW 9 Sarwan Dass in addition to the circumstantial evidence. 11. The question, therefore, is whether the prosecution proved guilt of the appellant beyond all reasonable doubt. In a case of circumstantial evidence all the circumstances from which the conclusion of the guilt is to be drawn should be fully and cogently established. The proved circumstances should be of a conclusive nature and definite tendency. The circumstances must be satisfactorily established and the proved circumstances must bring home the offences to the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It is not necessary that each circumstance by itself be conclusive but cumulatively must form unbroken chain of events leading to the proof of the guilt of the accused. The circumstances must be satisfactorily established and the proved circumstances must bring home the offences to the accused beyond reasonable doubt. It is not necessary that each circumstance by itself be conclusive but cumulatively must form unbroken chain of events leading to the proof of the guilt of the accused. If those circumstances or some of them can be explained by any of the reasonable hypothesis then the accused must have the benefit of that hypothesis. 12. In assessing the evidence imaginary possibilities have no role to play. What is to be considered are ordinary human probabilities. In other words, when there is no direct witness to the commission of murder and the case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances relied on must be fully established. The chain of events furnished by the circumstances should be so far complete as not to leave any reasonable ground for conclusion consistent with the innocence of the accused. If any of the circumstances proved in a case are consistent with the innocence of the accused or the chain of the continuity of the circumstances is broken, the accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt. 13. The question emerges, therefore, is whether the prosecution has established the four circumstances heavily banked upon in proving guilt of accused Shakuntia Devi with respect to the commission of offence under section 302, I.PC. 14. The first circumstance is that the strained relations cropped up between the deceased and accused Shakuntla Devi. In this respect, the court below has relied upon the deposition of PW 2 Sita Ram, PW 6 Jai Singh, PW 8 Giani Devi (mother of the deceased), PW 12 Banta Ram (brother of the deceased), PW 5 Bbag Singh and PW 14 Prem Singh. We have also closely perused the statements of the aforesaid witnesses and we are of the opinion that the court below has rightly appreciated the evidence in concluding that after the marriage of deceased Bimla Devi to accused Pawan Kumar, they had led a normal married life for two months and thereafter their relations became strained. PW 7 Lachman Dass has stated that in the month of Bhadon 1985, he requested accused Shakuntia Devi to send deceased Bimla Devi to his house and further offered that he will send his daughter-in-law to their house. PW 7 Lachman Dass has stated that in the month of Bhadon 1985, he requested accused Shakuntia Devi to send deceased Bimla Devi to his house and further offered that he will send his daughter-in-law to their house. The month is considered in auspicious and during first year of the marriage the daughter-in-law and mother-in-law do not live together. However, the said request was not acceded to. Then, PWs Lachman and Giani Devi had send Asha (daughter of accused Shakuntia Devi), their daughter-in-law, to the house of their other daughter on which the accused Shakuntia Devi had reported the matter to the Panchayat and the matter was settled by the Panchayat and Asha was then sent to her house. He has also stated that another complaint was lodged by accused Shakuntia Devi about the theft having been committed by the deceased, her daughter Asha and Ashas husband with the Panchayat. However, the matter was settled and deceased Bimla Devi returned to her in-laws house. This has been supported by other PWs as well. A compromise Ex. PC was arrived at the Panchayat on April 17, 1986 which bears the signatures of accused Pawan Kuoiar and his father Thandu Ram. It is to be noted that both the accused have denied that they had strained relations with the deceased or they ever maltreated her. The aforesaid facts and cir-cumstances do show the conduct of the accused persons. We hold that this circumstance has rightly been appreciated by the court below and we affirm the same. 15. The second circumstance consists of medical evidence. According to the statement of PW 1 Dr S. N Agnitutri, there was a lacerated wound over the middle of the fore-head and skin had peeled off and skin had greenish colouration with formation of multiple blisters all over the body, apart from other burn injuries, referred to above. The post-mortem report also reveals that the clothes worn by the deceased were not stained with blood nor burnt nor they bad smell of kerosene of petrol. Another important fact revealed by this report is that the deceased was found wearing two shawls one was red with green boarder and the other one was maroon coloured. This witness has admitted that lacerated wound was only present on the forehead He further admitted that factum of presence of haernatoma was not mentioned in injury No 1. Another important fact revealed by this report is that the deceased was found wearing two shawls one was red with green boarder and the other one was maroon coloured. This witness has admitted that lacerated wound was only present on the forehead He further admitted that factum of presence of haernatoma was not mentioned in injury No 1. In fact, there were two fractures observed by him on the dead body Taking into consideration the medical evidence, it is apparent that the external appearance and the wearing apparels which had no blood stains show that the burn injuries culminating into formation of multiple blisters on the entire body of the deceased could not have been caused by a single person. The deceased was having a sound physique as per the post mortem report. Further as none of the clothes worn by the deceased were stained with blood, it shows that after inflicting the lacerated wound on the fore-head, the red duppata had been tied. The infliction of burn injuries over the entire body with the wearing apparels by one person and particularly a female does not appear to be correct keeping in view the post-mortem report, Similarly, the observations of the medical expert rules out the possibility of one person inflicting these injuries in the manner stated by him- The medical expert does not rule out the possibility of the injuries on the forehead having been caused by strike of that portion of the head against any hard surface There is not an iota of evidence on record to show as to who was or were the assailant(s> and in what manner these injuries have been inflicted, it is further to be noted that none of the wearing apparels of the deceased had been burnt In view of the above it appears that the learned Court below in assessing the evidence has taken into consideration the imaginary possibilility of the iron pipe (P-6) having been used by accused Shakuntla Devi in inflicting the injury on the forehead of the deceased which is of the form of lacerated wound. Admittedly, there is no direct evidence to the commission of the murder and the case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence referred to above. Admittedly, there is no direct evidence to the commission of the murder and the case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence referred to above. To this extent, the inference drawn by the learned Court below cannot be upheld in the absence of any cogent consistent and convincing chain of circumstances leading to irresistible conclusion regarding guilt of accused Shakuntla Devi. Thus, we are unable to agree with the conclusion arrived at on the basis of medical evidence coupled with other circumstantial evidence regarding accused Shakuntla Devi to be the perpetrator 6f the crime under section 302 I.P C. 16. The third circumstance relied upon by the prosecution is the last seen theory. The defence of the accused is that the deceased alongwith her husband accused Pawao Kumar were living separately. This aspect of the case has not been discussed by the Court below. Admittedly accused Shakuntla Devi had lodged a report to the Panchayat regarding the theft of her articles by the deceased besides her daughter Asha and her husband Mast Ram This shows extremely strained relations between the deceased and accused Shakuntla Devi. This does not rule out the factum of deceased living with her husband separately from accused Shakuntla Devi, and if that be so then who committed the murder of Bimla Devi. This is neither borne out by the direct evidence or circumstantial evidence brought out by the prosecution. In otherwise case, if Bimla Devi is presumed to be living jointly with her mother-in-law, she was an inmate of tier house and her presence there was but a natural phenomenon. The sworn testimony of PW 3 Mahantu Ram and PW 11 Dhani Ram that they saw the deceased alongwith accused Shakuntla Devi near the hearth in the court-yard of their house on June 6, 1986 till 6 p. m is of no help to the prosecution to raise an inference that the latter is the assailant. The further testimony of these witnesses that on that day, accused Shakuntla Devi had abused the deceased 2 or 3 times is also not believable. The further testimony of these witnesses that on that day, accused Shakuntla Devi had abused the deceased 2 or 3 times is also not believable. None of them stated on oath that they had remained throughout the day near-about the court-yard of the house of the deceased or that of accused Shakuntla Devi, Thus, the last seen theory is also of no avail to the prosecution to foist the commission of the offence under section 302, I. P. C. on accused Shakuntla Devi. 17. The last circumstance relied on is the statement stated to have been made by accused Shakuntla Devi under section 27 of the Evidence Act leading to discovery of blow iron pipe (Ex, P-6) which is not of a conclusive nature connecting the accused with the crime. The recoveries were made long after the arrest of the accused. Accused Shakuntla had been arrested on June 11, 1986. Her disclosure statement was recorded 4 days thereafter and the recovery was effected on the following day i. e. on June 16, 1986. Ex P-6 had no blood stains on it. This is a very common instrument used daily In kitchens especially in rural areas. Apart from it, the statement of PW 13 Amar Singh, attesting witness of the disclosure statement merely disclose that the accused bad stated that she had kept concealed the blow iron pipe in the A wan (upper storey of her house) which she can get recovered. From this statement alone, coupled with other facts narrated above, it is not possible to find out whether the same was used as a weapon of offence and that too by accused Shakuntla Devi. Thus, merely on the basis of existence of strained relations between the deceased and accused Shakuntla Devi and further from the statement of medical expert, it cannot be inferred that she had used the blow iron pipe (P-6) for assaulting the deceased. 18. Thus considering the entire circumstances cumulatively, we find that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the main ingredients with respect to the use of blow iron pipe P-6 by accused Shakuntla Devi as weapon of offence and also the circumstances emerging from the medical evidence as discussed above. 18. Thus considering the entire circumstances cumulatively, we find that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the main ingredients with respect to the use of blow iron pipe P-6 by accused Shakuntla Devi as weapon of offence and also the circumstances emerging from the medical evidence as discussed above. As such the chain of circumstances is broken at every stage without connecting accused Shakuntla Devi to the commission of the alleged crime under section 302,-I. P. C. Therefore, accused Shakuntla Devi is entitled to the benefit of doubt to this extent. 19. Regarding commission of the offence by both the accused under sec 201, I. P. C., the testimony of PW 9 Sarwan Dass appears to have been correctly appreciated. This witness has his cow-shed near ‘karah-kund and he was feeding his cattle on June 7, 1^86 in the early hours of the morning when he was attracted by the loud noise of "Dharam" (splash). From that place and consequent thereto, he saw and found both the accused standing there and thereafter returning to their house. The attempt of the defence to assail the testimony of this witness on the ground that earlier there was a complaint against him by the husband of accused/ Shakuntla Devi, remains unestablished on record. Rather, this witness has denied lodging of such a complaint. Another argument that he was a chance witness and his presence was doubtful at the material time because he was working as a labourer at Chandigarh, is also devoid of merit. The reason is that this witness is a disinterested person. He has categorically admitted that he came from Chandigarh and was present at his house on June 7, 1986 The defence has completely failed to shake the credibility of this witness. On the other hand, the prosecution, with the help of this witness, has established that the dead-body was thrown by the accused persons in karah-kund on the morning of June 7, 1986 which was subsequently recovered on June 10, 1986. 20. Thus from the circumstantial evidence discussed above coupled with the direct evidence of PW 9 Sarwan Dass, the prosecution has been able to establish that both the accused had caused the evidence of the commission of the offence of murder to disappear with the intention of screening the offender from legal punishment though the real offender was not known to them. As such both of them are liable to be convicted of the commission of the offence under section 201. I. P. C. as has been held by the trial Court. The conviction of both the accused to this extent is upheld. 21. In view of the above we accept the appeal to the extent of setting aside the conviction and sentence of Shakuntla Devi under section 302, I. P. C. However, we maintain the conviction of both the accused for the offence under section 201,1. P. C. and the impugned judgment to that extent is upheld. 22. We have heard the learned Counsel for the accused-appellants on the question of sentence vis-a-vis the accused Shakuntla Devi, as we have been told that her co-accused also has already undergone the sentence imposed by the trial Court. Taking into consideration that she is a female and she had already undergone sentence from the date of her arrest, we take a lenient view and modify the sentence imposed by the trial Court to that of sentence already undergone by her for the commission of the offence under section 201, I. P. C. Order accordingly. Order accordingly. V. P. Bhatnagar, J.—After hearing arguments in the aforesaid case, we had made an order on November 8, 1990 maintaining the conviction and sentence against both the accused under section 201,1. P. C but setting aside the conviction and sentence of Shakuntla Devi under section 302, I P. C. for reasons to be recorded. It was further ordered that since the sentence awarded under section 201, I. P. C. had already been undergone (by both the accused), Shakuntla Devi, who was then in jail, be set at liberty forthwith The said reasons have now been recorded in a draft judgment prepared by brother D. P. Sood, J. I am in full agreement with the said reasons Since I would be out of Shimla on 17th and 18th of January, 1991 and the Court is closing for winter vacation thereafter, brother D. P. Sood, J. may announce the reasons on my behalf as well. Order accordingly.