RAVINDRA @ LADDOO RAJPOOT Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rajiv Lochan Shukla, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is no direct evidence of murder and the case is based on circumstantial evidence. FIR was lodged against unknown persons. The deceased left his house in Vaidpura for Etawah on 16.1.2012 and did not return home. When Preeti, sister-in-law of the deceased, talked with the deceased on mobile phone at 6 - 7 p.m., the deceased told her that he would be coming back within 10 minutes. Next morning, the dead body was found in the field of Lala Satya Prakash.

(3.) It was further contended that in the statement under section 161 Cr.P.C., the first informant disclosed that on 16.1.2012, in the afternoon at 1:00 P.M., the deceased had come home and again left the house in the company of the applicant. The wife and sister-in-law of the deceased stated on 19.1.2012 that in the evening of 16.1.2012, they talked to the deceased on mobile phone and he stated that he was purchasing vegetables and would return very soon.