from their conduct before and after the incident. In their defence under section 313 CrPC, the Appellants have stated that all 3 of them had went to Keela Earal to attend a function in the Tractor Company. They returned home only at 6 P.M. and found the deceased in an unconscious stage and they took her to the hospital. Admittedly, the Appellants had taken the deceased to the local hospital, however, none of the Appellants have been able to establish an alibi at the time of the incident. The silence of the Appellants in informing P.W.-1 or the family of the deceased of her death, also speaks volume of their conduct. Undisputedly, the Appellants and the Deceased resided together Crl. A. No.757 of 2015 Page 13 of 16since the marriage of the Deceased to Accused No.2, which substantiates their presence at the time of occurrence of the incident; and consequently the invocation of Section 106 of the Evidence Act cannot be faulted. 24. In the case of Trimukh Maroti Kirkan v. State of