Learned counsel Mr. Umesh Kant Vyas, learned counsel representing the appellant Kaluram, and Mr. K.R. Bhati, learned counsel representing the appellant Smt. Radha Sukhla, vehemently and fervently urged that there is no plausible evidence whatsoever on the record of the case to connect the appellants with the crime of murder of Shri Gangaram. The entire prosecution case is based on circumstantial evidence, which is sheerly based on conjectures and surmises. They pointed out that the dead body of Shri Gangaram was found lying abandoned in his own car on 16.06.2017. The FIR (Ex.P/55) was lodged by his son against unknown assailants. The Investigation Officer conducted laconic investigation and filed charge-sheet against the appellants purely on the basis of whims, conjectures and surmises. The appellant Kaluram has been linked in this case on the basis of recovery of currency notes to the tune of Rs.10,000/- and a mobile phone. However, neither the IMEI number of the mobile phone was brought on record nor the sim number allegedly being used by the appellant was proved during trial. Thus, as per Shri Umesh Kant Vyas, the prosecution allegation that the appellant Kaluram conspired with the accused Kaptan Sukhla for the murder of Shri Gangaram Teli is perfunctory and conjectural as the same is not based on any plausible evidence whatsoever. He submitted that the impugned judgment dated 22.09.2021, whereby the trial court convicted and sentenced the appellant as above is on the face of it perverse. The trial court reproduced the text of the depositions of various witnesses and without making any analysis and without drawing any conclusions, the opinion given by the Investigating Officers Kailash Chandra (P.W.22), Ranjeet Singh (P.W.23) and Shiv Lal (P.W.24) was accepted at para No.56 of the
