The Supreme Court, on further appeal, observed that there was material to indicate that there was long-standing enmity between the deceased and the accused, leading to the possibility that the accused was falsely implicated. The top court further took note of several defects in the investigation of the case as well.
“The failure/neglect to seize the weapons of offence, on facts and in the circumstances of the present case, has the effect of denting the prosecution story so much so that the same, together with non-examination of material witnesses constitutes a vital circumstance amongst others for granting the appellants the benefit of doubt,” the Court noted, in its judgment.
Source: Barandbench
