As per case facts, A1 borrowed a significant sum from the deceased, Manoharan, and evaded repayment, leading to a complaint. A1 conspired with others, including A3, A5, A6, A7, and ... A8, to abduct and murder Manoharan by suffocation, subsequently burying his body. The trial court convicted the accused based on circumstantial evidence, including motive (financial dispute), last seen theory, and recovery of evidence. The accused appealed, contending there were no eye-witnesses and that the prosecution failed to prove the circumstantial evidence principles. The question arose whether the prosecution adequately proved motive, last seen theory, and recovery beyond reasonable doubt. Finally, the Court found no perversity in the trial court's judgment, upholding that the prosecution successfully established the three cardinal principles of circumstantial evidence with corroborated proof, confirming the guilt of the accused. All appeals were dismissed.