In Brief
In this 2024 case, the Supreme Court acquitted the appellants of murder charges despite a brutal killing. The court found that the prosecution's case relied on legally inadmissible evidence: the eyewitness testimony contained major omissions from her police statement; CCTV footage lacked proper authentication; and confessions made to police officers were wrongly recorded. Applying established law, the court held that guilt must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt on admissible evidence alone. The brutality of the crime does not lower this standard. Since material evidence was inadmissible and the chain of circumstantial evidence was broken, conviction could not stand.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.