ORDER : The appellants in these appeals were found guilty of offence punishable under section 302 read with section 34 Indian Penal Code by the learned sessions judge, Jind and were sentenced to imprisonment for life. Their appeal to the High Court having failed, they are before us in these appeals. 2. The prosecution case stated briefly is that the appellant in criminal appeal No. 512/2002, Kamlesh was married to one Krishan and was residing at Narwana. The couple had no issue because of which she was visiting the appellant in criminal appeal No. 511/2002, who claimed to be a tantrik. It is the case of the prosecution that during these visits, she developed illicit relationship with him which was objected to by her husband. Therefore, these two appellants decided to eliminate the Krishan on the night between 22nd and 23rd of November, 1997. In furtherance of this plan, it is stated that on the night between 22nd and 23rd November, 1997 they got Krishan intoxicated, thereafter poured kerosene and set fire to him which caused his death. It is the further case of the prosecution that the two appellants then locked the house and went away and for many days nobody came to know of the death of Krishan since the only other occupant of the house i.e. the father of the deceased, Chandi Ram (PW 14) who used to stay mostly in his field. It is further case of the prosecution that PW 5 Zile Singh when he came to know of the death of Krishan informed Chandi Ram who on returning to the house and finding his son burnt to death lodged a first information report as to the death of his son. The prosecution further states that it is only on 19th December, 1999 Chandi Ram having come to know that the death of his son was not due to suicide but was because of murder, he filed a complaint. exhibit P1 before the police alleging that his son was murdered. On investigation police came to know through the evidence of PW 10 that on 22.11.1997 he had seen the appellant Sat Narain entering the house of the deceased at about 6 p.m. From the evidence of PW 8, it was seen that on the early morning of 23.11.1997 two appellants were standing near a bus stand waiting for a bus to go to Delhi. From the evidence of PW 4, it was found that the appellant Kamlesh had made an extra judicial confession to PW 5 stating that she and Sat Narain were responsible for the death of her husband. From the evidence of PWs. 11 and 12, it was found that Sat Narain the appellant also had made an extra judicial confession before these witnesses and had requested them to produce him before the concerned police as he was scared to go to the police alone. It is based on this evidence the courts below have come to the conclusion that the appellants are guilty of the charges framed against them. 3. In these appeals, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants stated that the courts below seriously erred in placing reliance on the evidence of PW 8 because it is unbelievable that at an early hour of 4.30 a.m. this witness on his way back from the field for no reason would decide to light a fire to warm himself while his residence was hardly a kilometer away. Therefore, his evidence that he met this appellant at that point of time at the bus stand should not be accepted. Similarly it was argued that evidence of PW 5 that appellant Kamlesh made an extra judicial confession before him cannot also be believed because of the fact admittedly this witness had not known Kamlesh earlier nor had met her earlier, therefore, it is highly improbable that Kamlesh would make such a confession to a stranger. We find some force in this argument advanced on behalf of the appellants on these counts. But then even if we eschew the evidence of the above said two- witnesses, there is still sufficient evidence to show that the appellants are guilty of committing the murder of Krishan. 4. From the evidence of PW 10, it is seen that the appellant Sat Narain was found on the evening of 22.11.1997 entering the house of the deceased. In the cross-examination, nothing has been brought about to disbelieve this witness. Similarly, from the evidence of PWs. 11 and 12 it is seen that Sat Narain had made. an extra judicial confession to these witnesses and has requested PW 12 to produce him before the police, even the evidence of these witnesses was not successfully challenged in the cross-examination. In the cross-examination, nothing has been brought about to disbelieve this witness. Similarly, from the evidence of PWs. 11 and 12 it is seen that Sat Narain had made. an extra judicial confession to these witnesses and has requested PW 12 to produce him before the police, even the evidence of these witnesses was not successfully challenged in the cross-examination. That apart, it is to be noticed that Kamlesh who claims that her husband had committed suicide did not inform about the death of her husband to anybody including her father-in-law. On the contrary, she had locked the house and gone away, and till the date of her arrest she had not returned back to the village. This circumstance also shows the involvement of Kamlesh in the death of her husband. In these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the courts below are justified in coming to the conclusion that these appellants are guilty of the offence. Accordingly, these appeals fail and are dismissed. 5. We record our appreciation for the assistance rendered by Ms. Shashi Kiran, learned amicus curiae. The fee of the learned counsel who appeared as amicus curiae is fixed at Rs. 750/-. Appeal dismissed.