In Brief
A father appealed the High Court's acquittal of two men convicted of murdering his son. The trial court had convicted them based on eyewitness testimony and physical evidence. However, the Supreme Court upheld the acquittal, finding substantial and actual doubts about guilt. The key eyewitness fled the scene without assisting the victim, contradictions existed in witness accounts, material witnesses were not examined, and the medical evidence provided no clear opinion linking the alleged weapons to the injuries. The Court held that when such substantial doubts exist, the accused has the right to acquittal under the principle that guilt must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.