Judgment Subhro Kamal Mukherjee, J. One Bodor Mal was the victim in the instant case. He used to work in a stone quarry. He used to go to the quarry at 700 a.m. and come back to his home at night. While returning home, the victim used to go to the house of Dhanbiti Besra, the mother of the accused, for drinking. On January 22, 2004, the victim left his home for work, but did not return home at night. On the following day morning, local people found the dead body of the victim in a playground of the village Bartala. There were bloodstained injuries on the head, throat and penis of the victim. The local people noticed blood spots on the village path in between the playground and the house of Dhanbiti Besra. Consequently, a complaint was lodged with Murarai police station on January 23, 2004, on the basis of which, Murarai Police Station Case No. 8 of 2004 dated January 23, 2004 was started under Sections 302/201/34 of the Indian Penal Code. After arrest of the accused/appellant, namely, Raghu Besra, the offending weapon was recovered at the instance of the accused. The case is based on circumstantial evidence. We, however, find that the chain is complete. The victim used to go to the house of the mother of the accused for drinking. It was found during the trial, particularly, from the evidence of the prosecution’s witness no. 5, namely, Binoy Kumar Ghosh, that there was a quarrel between Bodor Mal and Raghu Besra in the house of Raghu Besra regarding mixing of water in the wine. Therefore, the motive was established. On the very next day of the murder, when the body was recovered from the playground, blood spots on the village pathway in between the playground and the house of Dhanbiti Besra were found. Blood stains were, also, found in the courtyard and on the wall of the cowshed of the house of Raghu Besra. It is, therefore, clear that the victim was murdered in the house of Raghu Besra, who threw the dead body in the playground. Dr. Amal Kumar Saha, who conducted the post mortem of the victim, was examined as prosecution’s witness no. 11. He noticed several injuries and opined that subdural haematoma of right temporal region was sufficient to cause death. It is, therefore, clear that the victim was murdered in the house of Raghu Besra, who threw the dead body in the playground. Dr. Amal Kumar Saha, who conducted the post mortem of the victim, was examined as prosecution’s witness no. 11. He noticed several injuries and opined that subdural haematoma of right temporal region was sufficient to cause death. It is pertinent to mention here that immediately after the murder of Bodor Mal, the accused absconded. There was no explanation as to how the blood stains were found in the house of the accused. The offending weapon was, also, recovered at his instance. Therefore, we are of the opinion that the chain is complete to hold the accused guilty. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No. 3 at Rampurhat, Birbhum, is right in holding that the accused is guilty of charges under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. The accused has, rightly, been sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life. The accused was directed to pay fine of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees three thousand) only; in default, he was directed to suffer further imprisonment for a period of six months. We, also, find no infirmity in the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. There is no illegality or irregularity in the judgment and order of conviction and sentence. We do not find any merit in the appeal. As such, the same is dismissed. I agree.