In Brief
In this murder case, the appellant was acquitted by the trial court but convicted by the High Court on the basis primarily of a single eyewitness (PW1). The Supreme Court set aside the conviction and restored the acquittal, holding that PW1's conduct—refusing to help despite the victim's pleas, failing to check on her condition after the accused fled, and immediately advising the children to lodge an FIR—was unnatural and inconsistent with normal human behaviour. The Court emphasized that mere reputation for being educated and God-fearing cannot overcome such unnatural conduct, and that the failure to examine material witnesses (the victim's children) and the absence of fingerprint reports were significant gaps. The prosecution had not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.