Penal Code, 1860–Secs. 302/120-B, 143 & 201–Conviction–Sustainability –Conclusion of trial Court that accused H was suffering exploitation and victimisation from the deceased could not be proved because the evidence of prosecution witnesses showing that deceased and accused were having cordial relations–Case of prosecution that deceased was called to visit at the home of accused on telephonic message–Massage was attended by PW. 27 and caller was stranger for her and she was not having acquaintance with the voice heard–Witness of last seen can not be held reliable because the witness PW-22 was having knowledge about the death of deceased, however, he didnot choose to utter a single word while putting the signature on panchnama–No satisfactory explanation in regard to disclosing this fact for a long time–Recovery of stole cannot be held reliable instead of containing human blood because the witnesses were recovery were not independent and they were residents of distant place–Further, the recovery was made from open house of accused H–Prosecution knitted the theory of criminal conspiracy with the help of call details which were not in persuance of provisions of Sec. 65-B of Evidence Act–Recovery of maruti and presence of human blood stains also does not held to conclude that it was used for transport the body of deceased–Because the blood group was not determined and the van was not in exclusive possession of accused N–Prosecution failed to establish any criminal conspiracy between the accuseds–Merely evidence of visitor register of hotel is not sufficient for connecting the appellant B with the crime–Held, prosecution failed to establish the unbreakable chain of circumstances–Conviction deserves to be set aside.
