recorded at the earliest in the PCR form Ex.PW23/C is the genesis of the crime, in which he stated that he was having an illicit relationship with the deceased and her husband had witnessed the same, which led to a physical fight ( Maar Pitai Hogayi ). However, the prosecution story states that a fight over water had taken place which led to the incident. He argued that the brother of the accused, namely, Ramesh had not been examined by the prosecution. Mr. Singhal further argued that DD No.8A Ex.PW1/A was lodged at 6.12 a.m. regarding quarrel, whereas DD No.9A Ex.PW1/B was lodged at 6.15 a.m. to the effect that a lady had been stabbed and the assailant had been caught. However, the FIR of the instant case was registered belatedly at 9.30 a.m. on the statement of PW2. He submitted that though, the finger prints were lifted from the spot by PW12, but the same have not been examined. Ld. counsel further submitted that no case of commission of murder has been made out against the accused. In the alternate, it is submitted that at the highest, a case under Section 304 Part-II IPC is made out as the fight was on a petty issue, and there was no preplanning or intention of the accused to cause death of the deceased.
