As per case facts, the informant, along with family, went to a wedding, leaving an elderly relative, fuaa, to look after the house. Upon returning, they found the house broken ... into, articles scattered, and the fuaa murdered with a sharp weapon. Ornaments and other items were missing. The informant suspected several individuals, including the appellant. The trial court convicted the appellant for murder and robbery based on circumstantial evidence. The appeal was filed to the High Court challenging the conviction. The question arose whether the prosecution established the guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, given that key seizure witnesses for the recovered weapon and money turned hostile, and no suspected ornaments were found. Finally, the High Court found that the prosecution failed to prove the recovery of the weapon and money beyond reasonable doubt, and the chain of circumstantial evidence was incomplete. The conviction was quashed, and the appellant was acquitted.