In Brief
The appellant was convicted of murder by the trial court and the conviction was upheld by the High Court, primarily based on the testimony of a single eyewitness (PW-3). The Supreme Court set aside both judgments and acquitted the appellant. The Court found that the sole eyewitness's testimony was unreliable, marked by inconsistencies, unnatural conduct (he did not report the incident to police despite proximity to a police station), and lack of credibility. The prosecution also failed to establish the murder weapon's link to the accused through scientific evidence. The Court held that quality of evidence, not quantity, determines guilt, and a conviction cannot rest on a sole eyewitness lacking stellar credibility and independent corroboration.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.