VINAY KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter comes up for orders on an application for suspension of sentences filed by applicant-appellant Vinay Kumar.

(2.) Shri Vinod Sharma, learned Counsel representing the applicant-appellant vehemently and fervently urged that the entire case of the prosecution is false and fabricated and is based on circumstantial evidence which is flimsy and inconsequential. The prosecution has set up a theory that the accused appellant was indulged in extramarital affairs with the co-accused Sunita and that he conspired with her to eliminate her husband Satvir (the deceased) so that they could continue their illicit relationship in an unhindered manner. He urged that the evidence given to this effect by Anju (PW.1) being the daughter of the co-accused Sunita and the deceased Satvir is unbelievable and unreliable. As a matter of fact, the witness Anju did not even know the appellant from before and she was tutored and was made to give false evidence against the appellant. The allegation made by PW.1 Anju in her statement regarding the extramarital affairs between the appellant and the co-accused Smt.Sunita is a sheer improvement.

(3.) He referred to the statement of Smt. Savitri (PW.2), the mother of co-accused Smt. Sunita and urged that though in her statement recorded on 14/3/2016, the witness stated about the extramarital affairs between the appellant and the co-accused Sunita but as per him, the witness was recalled by the trial court on 20/7/2018 and while making deposition after being recalled, the witness categorically denied having given the earlier statement and was declared hostile by Public Prosecutor.