Vinod Goel JUDGMENT
Vinod Goel, J.
1. These appeals are directed against the judgment dated 9th December, 2016 passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, West, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi (ASJ) in Case No. 56384/2016 arising out of FIR No. 190/2013, Police Station (PS) Mundka whereby the appellants were convicted for murdering Sanjay, for the offence punishable under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), Section 302 IPC r/w Section 120B and Section 201 IPC r/w Section 120B IPC. The appellants have also challenged the order on sentence dated 15th December, 2016 whereby they were sentenced to undergo rigorous life imprisonment (RI) for the offence punishable u/s 302 IPC r/w Section 120B IPC. Appellant Rajiv @ Monu (A1) was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment (SI) for six months. Appellant Poonam (A2) was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine to undergo SI for two months. It was further directed that out of payment of fine of Rs. 25,000/-, Rs. 15,000/- would be given to the father of the deceased. Both the appellants were further sentenced to undergo RI for four years for the offence punishable u/s 201 IPC r/w Section 120B. A1 was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine to undergo SI for four months. A2 was directed to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- and in case of default of payment of fine to undergo SI for two months. The Ld. ASJ recommended the DLSA to award compensation to the legal heirs of deceased u/s 357A Cr.P.C.
2. As per the case of the prosecution on 5th September, 2013, A2 lodged a missing report of her husband at PS Mundka by DD No. 24A (Ex.PW7/A) to the effect that her husband Sanjay has not returned home since having left at 11.30 pm on 4th September, 2013. On the same evening Jagan Lal (PW1) aged about 80 years visited the PS and recorded his statement (Ex.PW1/A) and stated that his son Sanjay had not returned home since the night of 4th September, 2013. He added that his daughter-in-law (A2) used to meet A1 and despite objections raised by Sanjay, she did not stop meeting A1, which led to multiple altercations between Sanjay and A1. Further he stated that 2-3 days back, Sanjay had an altercation with A1 and his companion JCL Vicky who were working as Security Guards in the under construction flats of Supreme Company near their residence. He flagged his suspicion towards A1, JCL Vicky for kidnapping his son, and towards A2 for being involved with them in their act.
3. On the statement of PW1 (Ex.PW1/A), SI Birpal Singh (PW25) recorded his endorsement (Ex.PW25/A) and FIR No. 190/2013 under Section 365 IPC was registered on 5th September, 2013 and investigation was started. During investigation a secret informer conveyed to PW25 that Sanjay was murdered by A1 and JCL Vicky the previous night and both of them are hiding themselves near Vaishno Mata Mandir, near pond.
4. On identification by the complainant, PW25 and HC Ashok Kumar (PW27) apprehended both of them. Th........