( 1 ) THE order of conviction and sentence have been assailed primarily on three counts? firstly, the recovery of weapon doubtful; secondly the inference drawn by the learned Additional Sessions Judge that the appellant absconded after committing crime was without foundation, nor motive proved for the alleged crime; and finally prosecution failed to establish that the hair - recovered from the fist (muthi) of the deceased was that of the appellant.

( 2 ) BEFORE we appreciate the challenge raised by the appellant, we may glance through the relevant facts. Deceased Bano was the sister-in-law (Bhabhi) of the appellant. She was married to his brother Shabir. She had been living with her parents after her husband was involved in criminal case and sentenced. She had a son named Jahid from Shabir. Few months prior to this accident appellant brought her to Delhi from her parents house. She started residing in the house of Hasmat (PW-7) where appellant was also residing. On the fateful day i. e. 20/04/1995 she was found murdered in the basement of that house of Hasmat. Her throat had been cut. Hasmat (Pw-7) on getting the information that Bano had been murdered reported the matter