8 Though in this case, the prosecution has relied upon the circumstantial evidence, it is seen from the perusal of the evidence that the deceased and the accused are close relatives and it appears that there is also a love affair. It is the evidence of P.W.1 that his daughter used to leave the house for College everyday at 8.45 a.m. and return back at 4.30 p.m. However, on 11.10.2012, having gone to the College, she has not returned back to home and only her dead body was found floating on 24.10.2012 in a decomposed state and the body was identified by P.W.1 on the basis of the clothes worn by her. Though the prosecution has relief upon the evidence of P.Ws.5 to 8 to prove the last seen theory, the Trial Court has properly appreciated their evidence and found that their evidence is unbelievable and if really had they seen both the accused and deceased lastly together on 11.10.2012, they would have disclosed the same to the police when they were examined on 14.10.2012 itself. But, they have stated nothing about their seeing of both accused and deceased together on the occurrence date. Hence, the Trial Court disbelieved their evidence. Further, the Trial Court also disbelieved the evidence of P.W.7 on the ground that he has not informed about his seeing of the accused coming alone in motorcycle on 11.10.2012 at about 10.30 a.m., to the police immediately. He remained silent and having participated in the agitation to take action in this case, his conduct in not disclosing the factum of seeing the accused coming alone in the motorcycle at the relevant point of time to the police, made his evidence unreliable. Similarly, the evidence of P.Ws.5 and 6 and other witnesses, projected by the prosecution for the last seen theory also cannot be given much importance since those witnesses were examined only on 16.03.2013, i.e, nearly after five months, after the alleged occurrence of “woman missing” . If really the accused was seen along with the deceased on the date of occurrence on which date, the deceased was said to have been missing, the witnesses, being the residents of the same village, would not have been kept quiet. All these facts weighed the mind of the Trial Court to disbelieve their evidence.
