The Supreme Court has upheld the acquittal of two men in a double-murder case, finding that a key witness’s delayed disclosure made the prosecution narrative unsafe.
The witness claimed the accused, carrying sticks, had asked where the victims had gone. Yet he said nothing when he reached the crime scene and met relatives, disclosing the allegation only the next morning before the arrests. The Court found no convincing explanation for that silence.
Doubts deepened because clothes and sticks were allegedly recovered three days after arrest through interested witnesses, while other seizure witnesses were not examined. Blood grouping was not supported by DNA profiling capable of linking the stains specifically to the victims. Describing the recoveries as artificial and the case as resting on suspicion, the Court dismissed the State’s appeal. The judgment reinforces that a grave allegation cannot substitute for a credible evidentiary chain.
