As far back as in the year 1957, Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Sarwan Singh Rattan Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1957 SC 637 observed that there may be an element of truth in the version of prosecution against accused and considering as a whole, the prosecution story may be true; but between 'may be true' and 'must be true' there is inevitably a long distance to travel and the whole of this distance must be covered by legal, reliable and unimpeachable evidence before the accused can be convicted. It was further observed that degree of agony and frustration may be caused to the families of the victim by the fact that heinous crime may go unpunished but then the law does not permit the Courts to punish the accused on the basis of moral conviction or on suspicion alone. The burden of proof in criminal trial never shifts and it is always the burden of the prosecution to prove its case beyond reasonable doubts on the basis of acceptable evidence and in case of doubt, accused is entitled to get benefit of the same. Even if we take the most charitable liberal view in favour of the prosecution, all that we get is a suspicion against the appellants which cannot take the place of proof, therefore, appellants are entitled to get benefit of the same. Accordingly, both the appeals are allowed. The impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 2nd August, 1999 and 4th August, 1999 respectively convicting the appellants are set aside. The appellants are acquitted of the charges framed against them. Their bail bonds are discharged.