As per case facts, the appellant was convicted for murder as part of a Maoist extremist group who abducted three individuals and subsequently shot them dead. The appeal contested the ... conviction citing contradictions in witness testimonies, delayed FIR, alleged tampering of the crime scene, non-examination of key witnesses, and delayed recording of an eyewitness's statement. The question arose whether the sole eyewitness testimony, despite these objections, along with corroborative medical and investigative evidence, was sufficient to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Finally, the Court found the sole eyewitness's testimony reliable and trustworthy, corroborated by medical reports and the investigating officer. It clarified that delays in filing FIRs or recording statements, or even moving bodies from the scene, do not automatically discredit the prosecution if explanations are plausible and other compelling evidence exists. Thus, the charges of unlawful assembly, abduction, and murder were successfully proven.