JUDGMENT Sureshwar Thakur, J. - The aggrieved convict/appellant herein, through, the extant appeal strives, to, cast an onslaught, vis-a-vis, the verdict of conviction, made upon him, on 24.06.2019, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (II), Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P., upon, Sessions case number 6-D/VII/2018, qua charges framed under Section 302, and, under Section 201 of the IPC, and, also through his instituting the extant appeal, before this Court, he has strived to beget reversal, of, imposition, upon him, of, sentence, of, rigorous imprisonment for life, and, also payment of fine of Rs.10,000/-, and, in default whereof, he stood sentenced, to, under go rigorous imprisonment, for, a period of five months, for his committing an offence punishable, under, Section 302 of the IPC. He also becomes aggrieved, from the imposition, upon, him of a sentence, of, rigorous imprisonment, for, a period of five years, and, to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, and, in default whereof, he further became sentenced, to, undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five months, hence, for his committing an offence punishable under Section 201 of the IPC. All the afore sentences, as, imposed upon the accused/convict/appellant herein, were, ordered to run concurrently. 2. The genesis of the prosecution story, becomes embodied, in a previous statement, made, under Section 154 of the Cr.P.C., by one Rattan Chand, the father-in-law, of, the accused, before the Investigating Officer concerned, statement whereof, is, borne in Ex.PW1/A. In pursuance to the afore statement, a formal FIR, borne in Ex.PW 13/D, became registered with Police Station, Haripur, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh Therein, the complainant has made articulation(s) qua his retiring, from, the job, of, a Peon, in, the, Postal Department. Deceased Reena Devi, was, his eldest daughter. About 13 years ago, she was married to accused Balwinder Singh, in accordance with Hindu rites, and, ceremonies. On 26.10.2017, his wife along with his daughter, had gone to Hamirpur, for fetching medicines, for, his deceased daughter, namely, Reena Devi, as, she was suffering from certain tension. On their way, they visited accused Balwinder Singh. He also accompanied them from there to Hamirpur. They all returned home at around 4.30 p.m, and, they had their dinner together. Thereafter accused, and, his daughter Reena Devi, went to sleep, in, their room. On their way, they visited accused Balwinder Singh. He also accompanied them from there to Hamirpur. They all returned home at around 4.30 p.m, and, they had their dinner together. Thereafter accused, and, his daughter Reena Devi, went to sleep, in, their room. During morning, at about 5 a.m., his daughter-in-law, Smt. Sarika Devi, came with the morning tea, and, knocked the door, of, the room, of, his daughter, but there was no response from inside. She gave the cup of tea to him and, went to the kitchen. She again prepared the tea at around 7.00 a.m., for hence awakening, the, accused, and, deceased Reena Devi, yet, she failed to do so despite hers calling them. Consequently, he went to the window, and, therefrom called his daughter, thereupon, the accused came out of the room, and, followed him to the kitchen. The accused had his morning tea, in, the kitchen, and, then called him to his room, and, thereat, the accused confided in him, that, he had given all the tablets carried in a strip, to, Reena Devi. Thereupon, PW-1 Rattan Chand, noticed that water, was, coming out from the nostrils, as well as, the mouth, of, his daughter Reena Devi. Her pulse was not there. He also noticed bluish marks, on her neck, besides he also noticed that his daughter, had vomited near the bed, and, stains thereof, were on the ground, and, on the pillow cover. The strips of medicines were lying on the shelf. One of such strips was totally empty, whereas, from two strips, one tablet, was taken out, from each, of, those strips. These strips were brought by them, from, Hamirpur on 26.10.2017. Accused used to proclaim that in case the condition of Reena Devi would not improve, he would kill her. 3. The afore genesis of the prosecution case, as, borne in Ex.PW1/A, exhibit whereof embodies the statement of the complainant PW-1, one Rattan Chand, (a) was also enjoined, to, upon, his stepping into the witness box, hence, become narrated rather with completest concurrence therewith, (b) and, also without any gross improvements, and, embellishments being made therefrom(s). 3. The afore genesis of the prosecution case, as, borne in Ex.PW1/A, exhibit whereof embodies the statement of the complainant PW-1, one Rattan Chand, (a) was also enjoined, to, upon, his stepping into the witness box, hence, become narrated rather with completest concurrence therewith, (b) and, also without any gross improvements, and, embellishments being made therefrom(s). A wholesome reading, of, the testification, rendered before the learned trial Court, by the afore complainant, one Rattan Chand, makes categorical underlinings, vis-a-vis, his thereins making articulations, hence, bearing, the, completest compatibility, vis-a-vis, his previous statement recorded, in writing, and, as, becomes borne in Ex.PW1/A. Even during the course of his being put to the test, of, an acid cross-examination, he did not either contradict, all the afore echoings, as, made by him, in his examination-in-chief, nor he grossly embellished nor improved, upon, his previous statement recorded in writing, hence, embodied in Ex.PW1/A, wherefrom, his deposition, acquires tenacious evidentiary worth, (c) more so when it also acquires, the, completest corroboration, from, the deposition, of, his wife, one Lata Devi, who stepped into the witness box, as, PW-16. 4. The afore renditions, vis-a-vis, the prosecution version, as, borne in Ex.PW1/A, does enable this Court, to, draw an inference qua the accused, and, the deceased being the solitary occupants, of, the room occurring, in, the homestead, of, PW-1, (a) and, with firm echoing(s) occurring thereins, in display, vis-a-vis, the accused bolting from inside, the door of the room, hence, solitarily occupied by him along with his deceased wife, hence, obviously he precluded, the, ingress(es) thereinto, by any other member(s), of, the family of PW-1. Necessarily also, as, deposed with utmost consistency, and, mutual corroboration both, by PW-1, and, by PW-16, qua upon one Sarika Devi, the daughter-in-law, of PW-1, despite knocking twice, the, door of the room, occupied by the accused, and, the deceased, rather at 5.00 a.m., and, thereafter at 7.00 a.m, of the fateful day, inasmuch, as, on 26.10.2017, (a) yet no response emanating from the accused or from the deceased, (b) and, thereupons hers retrieving to the kitchen, whereupon, PW-1 became goaded, to go, to the window, to call the deceased, hence, leading the accused to egress, from, the apposite room. However, accused followed PW-1 to the kitchen, and, thereat he took his morning tea, and, apprised PW-1, vis-a-vis, his administering, the, entire strip of tablets, to, Reena Devi. However, accused followed PW-1 to the kitchen, and, thereat he took his morning tea, and, apprised PW-1, vis-a-vis, his administering, the, entire strip of tablets, to, Reena Devi. Consequently, PW-1 was constrained to visit, the, room, hence, solitarily occupied by the deceased, and, the accused, door whereof, become during the night hence bolted from inside by the accused, and, whereat he noticed, vis-a-vis, the deceased's, vomit existing at the bed, and, on the floor. The effect of the afore made deposition(s) rather with inter se corroboration, both by PW-1, and, PW-6, does evince, the conduct of the accused, rather being inconsistent with his innocence, and, rather it being consistent with his guilt. The afore rendered testifications, hence, with utmost inter se corroboration, do necessarily acquire, conclusive evidentiary worth, as, in their respective cross-examination(s), no suggestion(s) in denial, of, the afore factums, became meted to them nor obviously any denial or affirmative response(s) thereto, became elicited from both the afores. Consequently, the effect thereof, is, vis-a-vis, the reticence(s) of the accused to make responses, to, the repeated visit(s) to his room, of, one Sarika Devi, engendering suspicion, and, also when only, upon, PW-1 calling, for his deceased daughter, from, the window of the room, and, rather thereupon(s), the accused responding, and, his revealing, the, purported cause of demise of the deceased, being comprised in hers taking, the, entire strip of the prescribed medicines, hence bolsters an inference qua his afore conduct exemplifying, his, guilt. 5. Be that as it may, the empty strip, of, Oprex-5, comprised in Ex.P27, became recovered, through, recovery memo, borne in Ex.PW2/B, and, all became enclosed, in, cloth parcel Ex.P-28. The accused would succeed in scuttling the charges framed against him, only upon, the report, of, the FSL, making categorical echoings, vis-a-vis, the cause of demise, of, the deceased, being ascribable, to an over dose, of, the afore medicine, and, its consumption being volitional, and, obviously it not being forcibly administered,upon, the deceased, by, the accused. However, the report of the FSL, as, embodied in Ex.PA, carries underlinings, (i) vis-a-vis, the contents of the enclosed parcels, hence, exhibited as P/1, P/2, P/5-1, P/5-2 and P/5-4, (ii) upon, theirs being subject to analyses, theirs being found to contain phosphine gas, (iii) and, in Exhibits, P/3-1, and P/3-2, Chlorpromazine being detected, and, haloperidol being detected in contents of Ex. P/3-3, (iv) whereas, Chlorpromazie and Haloperidol, being not detected, in, the contents of parcels/exhibits P/1, P/2,P/4, P/5-1, P/5-2, P/5-3 and P/5-4. 6. Nowat, the afore conclusions, as, embodied in the report of the FSL, borne in Ex.PA, also became accepted, by the doctor, who conducted the postmortem examination, upon, the deceased, and, in consonance therewith he authored, his apposite opinion, as, becomes borne in Ex.PW7/D, (a) and, who also during, the course, of, his testification, made in Court, proved all the observations occurring therein, preeminently the one appertaining, to, his ascribing poisoning, to be the cause of demise, of, the deceased. However, the learned counsel appearing for the accused/convict, makes dependences, upon, the articulations, existing, in the cross-examination of PW-6, wherefrom whom, the deceased was receiving treatment, for, curing, the, ailment beset, upon, her, inasmuch, as, chronic schizophrenia, (b) and, wherein, he, overruled, the, factum of Oprex-5, being sedative, and, also dispelled, the factum, of, the consumption, of, the entire strip of the medicines, rather leading, to, the demise of the deceased. Consequently, he argues that, hence, their occur(s) inter se contradictions, inter se, the afore underlinings, as, made in the report of the FSL, vis-a-vis, the cause of the demise, of, the deceased, and, vis-a-vis, the afore echoings, hence, occurring in the cross-examination of PW-6, (c) and, also therefrom he strives to erect an argument, vis-a-vis, the failings, of, the prosecution, to collect, the strips of the fatal medicine, as, become enunciated in the report of the FSL, to beget the demise of one Reena Devi, rather causing the sequel, of, the accused becoming entitled to benefit of doubt. However, this court remains unimpressed, with the afore made submission, inasmuch, as, both in the inquest report, as, became initially drawn by the Investigating Officer, and, in the deposition of PW-7, there occur clear communications, vis-a-vis, some bruises occurring below the neck of the deceased. The occurrence of bruises/bluish marks, on the neck of the deceased, also stands consistently deposed with utmost tandem, and, unison, both by PW-1, and, PW-16. Conspicuously, also with the accused failing to give an explication, vis-a-vis, the deceased making vomits. Moreover, reiteratedly when no evidence surges forth, hence exemplificatory, vis-a-vis, his meteings, any, valid explication, qua the deceased making vomit, despite hers purportedly consuming, an, overdose, of, the prescribed medication, especially when intake whereof, is, evidently, not, the reason for her demise. Conspicuously, also with the accused failing to give an explication, vis-a-vis, the deceased making vomits. Moreover, reiteratedly when no evidence surges forth, hence exemplificatory, vis-a-vis, his meteings, any, valid explication, qua the deceased making vomit, despite hers purportedly consuming, an, overdose, of, the prescribed medication, especially when intake whereof, is, evidently, not, the reason for her demise. Consequently, all the afore, failings, of the accused, dispels, the, factum, of the deceased consuming an overdose, of the prescribed medicines. However, PW-7 since spells in his deposition, borne in his examination-in-chief, vis-a-vis, the hyoid bone being intact, and, hence strangulation cannot become concluded, to be the cause, of, demise of the deceased. 7. Be that as it may, the failure of collections or even failure of recoveries, at the instance of the accused, hence by the Investigating Officer concerned, vis-a-vis, the afore fatal medicines, hence, causing formation, of, phosphine gas, within the body of the deceased, in sequel whereto, she, as, depicted in Ex. PA, suffered her demise, (i) does not in the least, hence coax this Court, to dispel the findings, of, conviction drawn against the accused, by the learned trial Court, for, charges framed under Section 302, and, 201 of the IPC, (ii) and, the reasons for making the afore conclusion become generated from the afore inference manifesting hence the conduct of the accused, conduct whereof, is, palpably personificatory, of, his guilt than his innocence; (iii) it emerging, that, in the garb of a false explanation, vis-a-vis, the cause, of, demise of the deceased, the accused misleading, and, mis-maneuvering, the, investigations, vis-a-vis, the genuine cause, of, demise of the deceased, rather only for, precluding hence uncoverings being made by the Investigating Officer, vis-a-vis, the genuine cause, of, the demise, of, the deceased. Obviously the benefit of the afore mis-maneuvering(s), and, mis-communications, as, become deployed by the accused, for, his therethrough, hence misleading the investigations, cannot also become bestowed upon him. Obviously the benefit of the afore mis-maneuvering(s), and, mis-communications, as, become deployed by the accused, for, his therethrough, hence misleading the investigations, cannot also become bestowed upon him. (iv) Moreover, the accused completely failed to explain, the cause of occurrence, of, bluish marks, on, the neck of the deceased, and, when the afore lack, is construed, with, the afore inference, as, drawn against him, vis-a-vis, his conduct, being personificatory of his guilt rather than his innocence, (v) thereupon, the conclusion hence emanating therefrom, is rather, qua the accused stealthily in the guise, of, over dose, of, prescribed medications, becoming purportedly consumed by the deceased, for, hers' hence begetting alleviations, from her mental ailment, his obviously contriving a false reason qua over dose thereof, leading to her demise, (vi) and, also thereupon through the afore echoings occurring in the cross-examination of PW-6, wherein the latter makes underlinings, vis-a-vis, the recovered tablet of Oprex-5, not being lethal medicine, he falsely attempts to cover up, the, genuine factum, of his rather applying force, on the neck, of, the deceased, for, his becoming facilitated, to, forcibly administer, lethal drugs, upon, the deceased, (vii) factum whereof, become(s) pronounced in the report of FSL, to ultimately beget the demise of the deceased. Preeminently also hence with the prosecution proving the apposite motive, inasmuch, as, the accused proclaiming, given her chronic ailment, hence, to strive to get rid off the deceased, thereupon, the proof, of, the afore motive also begets an firm inference qua all the afore links in the chain, of, circumstances, fully proving the charges against the accused. 8. In summa, the conclusions, embodied in the report of the FSL, and, appertaining to the cause, of, demise of the deceased, are well founded, and, therethroughs, the charge against the accused becomes sustained. The potent motivating reason for this Court, for accepting the afore conclusion also become engendered, from, the factum, of, the relevant exhibits, as, became transmitted to the FSL concerned, hence in a sealed parcel, and, also upon theirs becoming produced, in court, for theirs being shown in Court, to, the prosecution witnesses, rather theirs thereat, not making disclosures, vis-a-vis, the enclosed therewithin contents, in the bottles, and, vials, becoming stealthily introduced or being tampered, especially when the seals embossed thereons, were all intact, importantly, at the afore stage. 9. 9. For the fore going reasons, there is no merit in the extant appeal, and, it is dismissed accordingly. Consequently, the impugned judgment, convicting, and, sentencing the accused/convict, for, his committing offences punishable under Section 302, and, under Section 201 of the IPC, is maintained, and, affirmed. All pending applications also stand disposed of. Records be sent back forthwith.