The main legal point established in the judgment is that a conviction based on circumstantial evidence must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, and discrepancies or doubts in the evidence can lead to the reversal of the conviction.

Judgment

SANTOSH HEDGE, J.

( 1 ) THE appellants in these appeals were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, New Delhi, for offences punishable under section 302 read with 34 IPC and were sentenced to udnergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500. They were further convicted for offence punishable under section 460 read with 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo life imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 500 read with 34 IPC and were sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years; in default of payment of fine awarded hereinabove, they were directed to further undergo RI for 3 months on each count. The above substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently. However, they were given benefit of Section 428 of the Code of criminal Procedure. The appeals filed by the appellants came to be dismissed by the High Court, hence the appellants are before us in these appeals.

( 2 ) THE prosecution case stated briefly is that one Smt. Sushma gulati (the deceased) was a resident of B-69, Paschim Marg, Vasant vihar, New Delhi. She was having export business under the name and style of Maharaja Exports. She had a factory at Naraina. She was also constructing another factory in Noida which work was being supervised by one Ramesh Kumar, PW-6 as a Manager. On 24. 12. 1997 in the evening said Sushma Gulati had left her place of work to her residence at Vasant Vihar where she was staying alone, being a divorcee. On 26. 12. 1997 at about 8. 30 a. m. , PW-6 tried to contact said Sushma Gulati over phone but could not get any response, therefore, he visited her house at Vasant Vihar at about 9. 45 a. m. when he found the house door open. On entering the house, he found said Sushma Gulati lying dead in the bed-room on the first floor of her house. He also noticed that the said room had been ransacked. Her immediately rang up the deceaseds lawyer by name Mr. Baldev Krishnan. He also telephonically informed the brother of the deceased by name Brig. S. K. Ravikant. On the advice received by them PW-6 contacted the Police Control Room telephonically. Said lawyer Mr. Baldev Krishnan and the brother brig. Ravikant immediately reached the place of incident. The police also appeared there soon thereafter. On a preliminary examination by the investigator it appeared that the deceased had died due to strangulation. They also found soem blood stains on the pillow, shirt and mattrress. They found one tin box of toffees, a pair of spectacles and some left-over tea in a glass tumbler. Said articles were seized. On an examination of the deceaseds car they found certain papers including 2 complaints addressed to the Police, Noida. These complaints wree made by the deceased in regard to an incident which took place on 23. 12. 1997 with one Gaurve Tyagi with whom she had an altercation. In the complaint she had stated that said Gaurav Tyagi had assaulted her causing a fracture of her finger. She also stated in the said complaint that said Gaurav Tyagi had threatened to kill her. On post mortem examination of the body which was done on 28. 12. 1997 the doctor opined that the death had occurred about 3-1/2 days prior to the autopsy due to asphyxia as a result of strangulation.

( 3 ) DURING the course of investigatioin the investigating agency came to know that the first appellant herein Kuldip Singh was working with the deceased during November, 1997 but his services were terminated because the deceased had suspected him of having stolen certain articles in the house. The investigating agency also came to know that Kuldip was re-employed by the deceased on 20. 12. 1997 hence the investigators procured the said appellant for interrogation. On such interrogation having come to know the involvement of other 2 appellants, namely, Ram Singh and Om prakash they were also apprehended. The prosecution avers that during the course of investigation they came to know that these 3 persons had gone to the house of the deceased on 24. 12. 1997 with a view to commit theft of the valuable which