Chain of events

Evidence of the prosecution provided a corroborated chain of events from the complainant quarrelling with her husband who left the house being annoyed with the husband

Coming back a week later and knowing the time the complainant left for work laying in wait for her in the street outside her house to his throwing acid on her

Reporting the matter to the police to the medical evidence in respect of both the complainant and the accused to the positive chemical report on the clothes which were worn by the complainant at the time when the acid was thrown on her by the accused

Circumstances established that the prosecution had proved its case against the accused beyond a reasonable doubt

Appeal was dismissed accordingly.

Every circumstance should be linked with each other and it should form such continuous chain that its one end touches dead body and the other neck of accused

If any link of chain is missing then its benefit must go to accused.

Incident was blind murder and on the basis of circumstantial evidence, Trial Court convicted accused and sentenced him to death on two counts

Prosecution did not produce any witness who had identified dead bodies of two unknown persons to be that of deceased in question

Prosecution witness stated during cross-examination that dead bodies were buried by ambulance service people, who told the witness that dead bodies were of deceased in question

None from staff of ambulance service was produced in witness box by prosecution to establish identification of dead bodies

No application for disinterment of dead bodies was brought on record

Prosecution had not been able to prove beyond shadow of doubt that dead bodies were not of unknown persons which were discovered by complainant and were those of deceased in question

High Court set aside conviction and sentence awarded to accused by Trial Court, as prosecution had failed to prove its case against him beyond shadow of doubt and he was acquitted of the charge

Appeal was allowed in circumstances.