As per case facts, the appellant was convicted for his wife's murder. The prosecution alleged that the appellant assaulted his wife with a stick, hand, and fist after she refused ... money for alcohol, leading to her death. The informant's wife testified that the appellant confessed to the killing. The deceased's body had severe injuries including fractured ribs and a ruptured spleen, consistent with assault by a stick. The appellant was arrested from his house, and a stick was recovered. He claimed alibi, stating he was away, but police records contradicted this. The question arose whether the circumstantial evidence, including the "last seen" theory, homicidal death, and the appellant's failure to explain his wife's death in their home, was sufficient for conviction given his false alibi. Finally, the Court affirmed the death as homicidal within the appellant's home. His failure to explain his wife's death, coupled with the false alibi and history of domestic violence, shifted the burden of proof under Section 106 of the Evidence Act. The medical evidence corroborated the assault. The Court found the chain of circumstantial evidence complete, upholding the conviction and dismissing the appeal.