ORDER : The present appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 13/03/2007, passed by High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No.749-DB of 2003 affirming the order of conviction and sentence dated 5/6.9.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court),Gurgaon in sessions Case No.68 of 2001/2003 for the offences punishable under Section 364/302/201 read with Section 34 IPC and sentenced each of the appellants to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay fine of Rs. 2000/-, and, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 302/34 IPC. Be it noted, the learned trial Judge had imposed separate sentences in respect of other offences which has been affirmed by the High Court. 2. The prosecution case as unfolded is that an FIR was lodged on 11/12/2000 alleging that the appellants along with others had abducted two persons namely, 'Kali' and 'Kasam'. They all took the brother-in-law, the informant, and others who tried to save the two persons who were abducted by the accused persons but the effort went in vein. They were taken by the accused-appellants on 5.12.2000 and thereafter out of fear, the information could not be lodged but was ultimately it lodged on 11.12.2000. The horrible part of the crime came to light when two headless bodies were found and were identified by the relatives and the villagers to be that of the deceased persons 'Kali' and 'Kasam'. 3. The investigating agency proceeded with the investigation, examined the material witnesses and after completing all the formalities submitted the charge sheet before the learned Magistrate who in turn committed the matter to Court of Session. The prosecution examined number of witnesses and got series of documents marked as exhibits and brought certain material objects on record. The learned trial Judge upon analysing the evidence on record came to hold that the whole case rested on circumstantial evidence and the chain was complete and accordingly convicted the appellants. 4. On an appeal being preferred, the High Court noted with anguish about the nature of crimes taking place quite frequently because of the animosity between the various groups in the village and also the manner in which the appellants tried to eliminate the evidence. 4. On an appeal being preferred, the High Court noted with anguish about the nature of crimes taking place quite frequently because of the animosity between the various groups in the village and also the manner in which the appellants tried to eliminate the evidence. The High Court scrutinised the evidence in detail and found the chain of circumstances led to a singular and unquestionable conclusion that the accused-appellants had committed crime. 5. We have heard Mr. Ajay Veer Singh Jain, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Mr. Ramesh Kumar Shokeen, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-State. 6. It is submitted by Mr. Jain, learned counsel for the appellant that both the trial Judge as well as the High court have fallen into an error by coming to hold that the prosecution has been able to prove the case by establishing the guilt of the accused though there are incurable missing links in the chain of circumstantial evidence. Learned counsel would also submit that the delay in lodgment of FIR makes the prosecution case doubtful. 7. Per contra, Mr. Ramesh Kumar Shokeen, learned counsel for the State supported the judgment of conviction. 8. We have bestowed our anxious consideration and carefully perused the FIR, the evidence brought on record, judgment passed by the trial court as well as that of the High Court. As far as the delay in registering FIR is concerned, we find there was a fight between the villagers and they formed groups and earlier a case was registered under Section 307 IPC against one of the accused persons and, therefore, in the obtaining factual matrix the explanation that the informant group was trying to search and making an effort to find out the abducted persons and save their lives further and they were in a state of panic could be well appreciated. Thus, we are not impressed with the submission that there was a delay in lodgment of the FIR. 9. As far as the chain of circumstances is concerned, we find that there is ample evidence on record that the deceased persons had been abducted by the accused-appellants. The theory of last seen gets squarely appreciated and nothing has been brought on record to disbelieve the witnesses who have deposed in that regard. In fact, it has been clearly established. As far as the chain of circumstances is concerned, we find that there is ample evidence on record that the deceased persons had been abducted by the accused-appellants. The theory of last seen gets squarely appreciated and nothing has been brought on record to disbelieve the witnesses who have deposed in that regard. In fact, it has been clearly established. It is perceptible from the material on record that two headless bodies were recovered and they have duly identified. 10. In view of the aforesaid, the irrestibile conclusion is that chain of circumstances is complete and accordingly, there is no justifiable reason to differ with the view expressed by the High Court. Consequently, the appeal, being sans merit, is dismissed. Appeal dismissed.