The evidence relating to the motive of the occurrence and found that the respondent who had married the deceased as his second wife had not only entertained a suspicion about her fidelity but was also repeling the conduct of the deceased for her finding fault with his activities, affairs and association with his friends.

It was not in dispute that on the ill-fated night both the husband and wife that is the ( respondent and the deceased) took their bed in the room, which was in their exclusive use and that barring the two ,no one was in their room and that the deceased was found dead in the early morning notwithstanding the reason for her death. The case of the Prosecution is that the respondent caused several ante mortem injuries to the deceased and ultimately strangulated her resulting in her death.

It was only thereafter the respondent sprinkled kerosene on the dead body and burnt it to cause disappearance of the evidence of murder in order to screen himself from the legal punishment and all the burns were only post mortem injuries.

In a case based on circumstantial evidence, motive assumes pertinent significance as existence of the motive is an enlightening factor in a process of presumptive reasoning in such a case. The absence of motive , however puts the court on the guard to scrutinize the circumstances more carefully to ensure that suspicion and conjecture do not take place of legal proof.

With the ruling out of the circumstances relating to the recovery of the ornament as not having been established conclusively, the chain of the circumstantial evidences snaps badly ,there were some other circumstances also in the Prosecution case which militate against its correctness. Admittedly, the nail clippings of the nails of the deceased had been taken by the police.

There was also recovery of the hair from the cot where the dead body was lying and and the removal of the hair from the scalp of the appellant by the IO for the purpose of their comparison.

The report of the Chemical Examiner has not connected the hair recovered from the cot with those of the appellant. There was no material on the record either to show that the nail clippings had any blood ,which could have tailed with the blood group of the appellant. Thus both the nail clippings and the hair have failed to connect the appellant with the crime.

Surinder Pal Jain vs Delhi Admin AIR 1993 SC 1723